search_patients

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the behavioral disclosure burden. It only states the basic search action and does not reveal behavior such as partial vs. exact matching, result ordering, the effect of the default limit, or FHIR search semantics. The agent is left guessing about pagination or truncation 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?

A single short sentence with zero filler. It front-loads the action, target, and filter criterion. It is appropriately minimal for a straightforward search 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?

The tool is simple and an output schema exists, so return values do not need explaining. However, the description omits the default limit and does not clarify whether results are bounded or how search matching works. It is minimally viable but leaves an agent to infer basic behavioral expectations.

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. It maps 'por apellido' to family_name, but it does not explain the required nature of family_name, the meaning of limit, or its default value of 5. The parameter documentation burden is effectively unmet beyond a one-word hint.

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 uses a specific verb ('Busca' / 'search'), a clear resource ('pacientes' / 'patients'), a filtering criterion ('por apellido' / by last name), and a context ('servidor FHIR'). It unambiguously distinguishes the tool from the sibling get_observations, which targets a different FHIR resource.

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 usage context is implied by the verb and resource: this is the tool for finding patients by family name. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to prefer this over get_observations, and no mention of limitations or filters such as the limit parameter affecting usage.

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