tebra_register_external_vendor

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

No annotations provided; description bears full burden. It mentions 'register' (creation) but does not disclose side effects, idempotency, permission requirements, or error handling. The description is too brief to inform the agent of expected behavior.

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?

Single sentence, no redundancy, front-loaded with action and resource. Every word serves a purpose.

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 low complexity (2 params, no output schema), the description is minimal but adequate for a simple registration tool. However, it lacks behavioral details (e.g., return value, duplicate handling) that could aid agent decision-making.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds the context 'for external ID mapping' but does not elaborate on parameter meaning beyond the schema (e.g., vendorName is just 'Vendor name to register'). No additional semantic value.

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 ('register'), resource ('new external vendor'), and purpose ('for external ID mapping'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'tebra_get_external_vendors' (retrieval) and 'tebra_update_patient_external_id' (update).

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool vs. alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, such as checking if the vendor already exists, or when not to use (e.g., if vendor already registered).

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