set_patient_profile

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that data is stored locally and used for personalization, which is useful. However, it does not mention whether saving overwrites existing data, merges, or what response to expect. For a mutation tool, this is a moderate transparency gap.

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 two sentences: the first states the action and examples, the second explains storage, purpose, and optionality. It is front-loaded with the verb, has no filler, and every sentence contributes to understanding the tool.

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 complexity (9 parameters, nested objects, no output schema), the description provides essential context: what it does, where data is stored, why it's useful, and that all fields are optional. It omits details like overwrite semantics, but this is not critical for deciding to use the tool. Overall, it is sufficiently complete for selection and invocation.

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 descriptions cover 100% of parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description adds 'All fields are optional,' which is a critical semantic not explicitly stated in the schema (though required count is 0). It also lists key fields, reinforcing the schema without redundancy, but doesn't elaborate on nested objects or units, which are already documented.

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 opens with 'Save patient profile information,' a clear verb and resource, and lists example fields (age, weight, height, chronic conditions, etc.). This distinguishes the tool from siblings like get_patient_profile and delete_patient_profile, which have different actions.

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 context: the information is stored locally and used for personalized medical information during consultations, implying when to use this tool. It doesn't explicitly state alternatives or exclusions, but the purpose and context are sufficient for an agent to choose it over siblings.

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