feegow_professional_appointments

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries full responsibility. It only indicates the HTTP endpoint and basic action, but does not disclose pagination, required authentication, or other behavioral traits (e.g., date range filtering).

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 a single concise sentence, efficiently conveying the primary purpose. It could include more detail without becoming verbose.

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 the complexity of the tool (2 params, no output schema, many siblings), the description is insufficient. It does not explain what the response contains, how to use the query parameter, or handle potential errors.

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 schema covers 50% of parameters descriptively, but the description adds no meaning to the two parameters. The profissional_id parameter is hinted by 'de um profissional' but not explicitly explained. The query object is ignored.

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 it lists appointments for a professional ('Lista os agendamentos de um profissional'), distinguishing it from the more general feegow_list_appointments sibling. It does not explicitly name the alternative, but the purpose is evident.

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 versus alternatives like feegow_list_appointments or feegow_agenda. The description only states what it does, without usage context.

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