tebra_get_appointment_detail

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It explicitly mentions the returned data aspects (recurrence rules, group data, resource slots), giving good transparency into what the tool returns. However, it does not explicitly state that it is read-only or discuss any side effects, which is acceptable for a 'get' 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 a single sentence that is front-loaded with the primary purpose and covers key details without unnecessary words. Every word earns its place.

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 simple get-by-ID tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description is fairly complete. It explains what the tool returns, which is sufficient. It could be enhanced by mentioning the return type (e.g., 'returns an appointment object'), but the current description is adequate.

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 coverage is 100% with a clear description for appointmentId ('Tebra appointment ID'). The tool description does not add further detail about the parameter beyond what the schema provides, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 gets full detail for a single appointment by ID, specifying what is included (recurrence rules, group data, resource slots). It distinguishes from sibling tools like tebra_get_appointments (list) and tebra_update_appointment (mutation).

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 you need full details for a specific appointment, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., tebra_get_appointments for a list) or any prerequisites. No exclusion criteria or when-not-to-use guidance.

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