cms_hospitals

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

The readOnlyHint annotation establishes this as a safe read operation, and the description's 'Query' wording is consistent. The description adds context about the types of data accessible, but it does not disclose behavior such as the need to select a specific dataset (via the dataset parameter) or potential pagination/limits beyond the schema's limit parameter.

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 a single, well-structured sentence that front-loads the core action ('Query CMS hospital data') and then lists the data categories in a clear, comma-separated format. No filler or redundant information.

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 tool's moderate complexity (4 parameters, no output schema), the description adequately lists the type of data available but does not clarify how the dataset parameter relates to those categories—an agent might mistakenly expect all categories in a single response. It also lacks detail on return structure, though the schema partially compensates.

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?

All four parameters have descriptions in the schema (100% coverage), so the description adds limited extra value. It identifies state and city as filter options, which is already clear from the schema, and does not elaborate on the dataset parameter or its enum values.

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 the tool's purpose: 'Query CMS hospital data,' and enumerates the specific data categories available (general info, quality ratings, mortality, readmissions, infections, patient surveys, Medicare spending). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like cms_nursing_homes or cms_search by focusing specifically on hospital data.

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 provides clear usage context by noting that results can be filtered by state or city, aligning with the state and city parameters. However, it does not explicitly mention when to use this tool versus alternatives such as cms_nursing_homes or cms_search, nor does it provide exclusions.

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