tebra_search_patients

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

With no annotations, the description adds some behavioral context: it returns demographics and insurance policies and mentions filter flexibility. However, it omits details like pagination, default behavior with no filters, or rate limits. The lack of annotations increases the burden, but the description partially compensates.

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?

Two sentences effectively front-load the purpose and usage. Every clause provides value: first sentence defines action and flexibility, second gives concrete filter groups and return types. No wasted words.

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 18 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the general purpose and return content but misses important context like pagination, sorting, or default behavior when no filters are specified. The lack of output schema means the description should elaborate more on the return structure, but it only gives a vague 'demographics and insurance policies'.

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 all parameters have descriptions. The description adds a high-level strategy (use query for name search, combine specific fields), which is helpful but not essential. It does not add meaning beyond what the schema already provides for individual parameters.

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 searches for patients with flexible filters and lists specific filter types. It distinguishes itself from siblings like tebra_get_patient (single patient by ID) and tebra_get_all_patients (list all) by emphasizing flexible, combinable filters, though not explicitly naming alternatives.

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 advises using query/fullName for name search and combining specific filters, but does not contrast with similar tools (e.g., using get_patient for exact ID) or specify when not to use this tool. Guidance is implied but lacks explicit boundaries.

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