pacientes_pesquisar

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses a key behavior: fallback only on the returned page if the API does not support server-side filtering. This is valuable transparency beyond basic read-only intent, though it could explicitly state that it is a read operation.

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 concise with two sentences. The first sentence states the core purpose, and the second adds an important behavioral note. Every sentence earns its place with no wasted words.

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?

For a search tool with 4 optional parameters and no output schema, the description covers the search functionality and fallback behavior adequately. It does not describe the return format, but that is often implicit; the description is sufficient for an agent to understand when and how to use it.

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?

The input schema has 100% coverage, and the description adds meaning by listing the types of search (nome, CPF, telefone) and mentioning normalization of CPF and telefone to digits, which is not in the schema descriptions.

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 action 'Pesquisa' (search) and the resource 'pacientes' (patients), and specifies the search criteria (nome, CPF, telefone). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'pacientes_listar' (list all) and 'paciente_detalhar' (detail).

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 guidance on when to use it (searching by name, CPF, phone) and mentions a fallback behavior if the API doesn't support filters. However, it does not explicitly recommend alternatives or state when not to use this tool.

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