athena_report_outcome

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It mentions non-blocking and one-call limits, but does not describe what the tool does besides reporting (e.g., no side effects, idempotency, or error handling). Basic but not comprehensive.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with purpose, no wasted words. Every sentence adds value.

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 no output schema and 7 parameters (all described in schema), the description lacks information about what the tool returns or confirms (e.g., success indicator). Adequate but could be more complete.

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% with clear descriptions. The description adds context about measuring value, but does not enhance parameter semantics beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 verb 'report' and resource 'outcome of an athenahealth-related interaction', and specifies when to call it ('after producing an artifact'). It is distinct from sibling tools, which are query/diagnosis/feedback tools.

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?

It provides clear context for when to use ('after producing an artifact'), enforces 'one call per logical interaction', and notes it is non-blocking. It does not explicitly list when not to use, but the usage is well-scoped.

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