patient_opd_list_search

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It only mentions two filter parameters and does not state whether the operation is read-only, what authentication is required, what the return shape is, or any side effects. For a search tool, read-only behavior is implied but not stated.

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 brief and front-loaded with the purpose, followed by the args. It is concise and wastes no words, though the brevity contributes to missing critical information. Structurally effective for what it covers.

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?

With six parameters, three required, no annotations, and no output schema, the description covers only a fraction of the tool's interface. It omits credentials, the hisno context, and the boolean flag, and does not describe return values or behavior. The tool is complex enough to require a fuller description.

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 description adds useful examples and format hints for doc_regex and dept_regex, which helps beyond the schema titles. However, it ignores required parameters (eip_id, eip_password, hisno) and the old_than_four_years flag, leaving those without semantic guidance.

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 states '搜尋門診清單' (search outpatient list), a clear verb+resource pairing. The regex filtering qualifier adds specificity, but it does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling tool patient_opd_list, which likely also deals with outpatient lists.

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 implies the tool is for searching with regex filters on doctors and departments, but it does not explicitly state when to use this over alternatives like patient_opd_list. No exclusions or alternative recommendations are given.

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