feegow_get_lab_report_file

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

The description discloses a key behavioral trait: the returned URL is authenticated and valid for 20 minutes. With no annotations, this adds crucial context. It doesn't cover other aspects like permissions or side effects, but the provided detail is valuable.

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 two concise sentences plus endpoint. Front-loaded with the action, minimal waste. Every part 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?

The description explains the output (authenticated URL) and its validity, which is adequate for a file retrieval tool with no output schema. It covers essential context but could benefit from specifying the response format (e.g., JSON structure).

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 does not add parameter-specific meaning beyond the schema; it only reiterates the existence of lab_report_id implicitly. 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 tool's purpose: retrieving a lab report file. It specifies the resource ('laudo') and distinguishes from siblings like feegow_get_medical_report by explicitly mentioning 'lab report' and the HTTP endpoint.

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 needing the file of a lab report, but gives no explicit guidance on when to use this over alternatives or when not to use it. No sibling differentiation beyond the name.

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