Mental Health Provider Finder

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It adds only 'DEMO,' which hints at a limited or non-production state, but does not explain the data source, verification of 'licensed' status, or any restrictions. 'Find' implies read-only behavior, but that is not made explicit.

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 front-loaded sentence that conveys the core purpose efficiently. The trailing 'DEMO' is vague but not verbose; there is no wasted wording beyond that.

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?

Although the tool is simple with optional parameters and an output schema, the description still omits provider_type entirely and fails to clarify what 'DEMO' means for invocation or results. An agent can make a basic county-only call, but it is not fully equipped to use all inputs or understand limitations.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for both parameters. It explains county as a geographic filter ('by county') but says nothing about provider_type, leaving one of two parameters 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 begins with a specific verb and object: 'Find licensed mental health practitioners in Kenya by county,' which clearly states the tool's resource and scope. It is semantically distinct from sibling tools like crisis_line_directory and mental_health_rights, so an agent can tell them apart without opening schemas.

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 usage when looking for licensed practitioners in a Kenyan county, but it does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over alternatives or when not to use it. There is no sibling routing or exclusionary guidance, so the context is inferred rather than stated.

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