list_appointments

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full transparency burden. It discloses that each event includes date, time, description, location, and patient name, which is useful. However, it does not mention authorizations, sorting, limits, or whether it returns only a summary, leaving room for ambiguity.

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 short sentences that immediately state the purpose and then list the returned fields. Every sentence earns its place, and there is no wasted text or repetition of the tool name.

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?

For a zero-parameter read-only list tool, the description is adequately complete: it states the scope (upcoming and recent), source (calendar), and the fields returned. It could mention whether login is required or how many items are returned, but these are minor gaps given the simplicity.

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 tool has zero parameters and the schema properties are empty, so the baseline is 4. The description adds value by explaining what is returned, though it does not need to explain parameter behavior since none exist.

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 ('Return') and names the resource ('appointments from the calendar') with a clear scope ('upcoming and recent'). This clearly differentiates it from siblings like list_timeline or list_notifications, which cover different calendars or notification types.

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 when to use the tool: when you need upcoming and recent appointments with their details. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives like list_timeline for broader calendar events, so the guidance is reasonably clear but not explicit.

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