professionnel_by_rpps

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Beyond annotations (readOnlyHint=true, etc.), the description details fallback to live FHIR API, staleness of local DB, source field, and per-parameter effects, adding substantial behavioral context.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is dense and front-loaded with key info, but slightly verbose. However, every sentence adds value with no repetition.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the presence of output schema and multiple siblings, the description covers ID format, multiple-site behavior, fallback, source field, and parameter details, leaving no critical gaps.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

For rpps_id, description explains format (11-12 digits, prefix '81') and multiple-site returns. For include_freshness, it clarifies scope and caching. Schema coverage is 50%, but description compensates fully.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states 'Fiche d'un professionnel de santé par identifiant national' (profile by national ID), specifies the ID format, and distinguishes from siblings like rpps_search_by_name which is for name-based search.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description explains when to use (exact ID lookup) and provides fallback behavior, but does not explicitly exclude alternative tools for name or radius searches.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.