Search for encounters by providing parameters. Retrieves encounter data from Bahmni through the OpenMRS REST API.
Search for encounters by parameters.
This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.
{
"id": 1,
"jsonrpc": "2.0",
"method": "tools/call",
"params": {
"arguments": {},
"name": "findEncounters"
}
}| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| body | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description fails to disclose any behavioral traits like authentication needs, rate limits, or side effects. Annotations are absent, increasing the burden on the description.
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 concise but overly minimal, missing essential details that would justify its length.
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?
Without output schema or annotations, and with an undocumented parameter, the description is severely incomplete, leaving the agent without critical information for correct usage.
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?
The single parameter 'body' (an object) is entirely undocumented. With 0% schema description coverage, the description offers no information about what fields or structure the body accepts.
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 'Search for encounters by parameters' clearly states the action and resource, but lacks differentiation from sibling search tools like searchPatients or searchOpenMRSConcepts.
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 is provided on when to use this tool over alternatives, such as specific encounter retrieval methods or other search tools.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.