list_practitioners

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the operation lists all practitioners, implying a read-only, safe action. However, it does not mention authentication requirements, pagination, or output formatting, which would improve transparency.

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?

Two sentences, no redundancy. The first states the function, the second gives actionable usage guidance. Every word earns its place, and the most important info is front-loaded.

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?

With no output schema or annotations, the description is the sole source of information. It clearly explains the purpose, usage timing, and how to use the output. It omits potential details like pagination or authentication, but for a simple list-all tool, the description is sufficient for most contextual needs.

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?

There are zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description adds significant value by telling the agent that the response contains a valid PractitionerId, which is directly useful for the follow-up create_appointment call. This goes beyond the empty schema.

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?

Verb 'List' + resource 'practitioners' clearly states the operation. Scoping to 'IntakeQ account' and the explicit tie to 'find a valid PractitionerId' before create_appointment distinguishes this from sibling list tools (list_notes, list_clients, etc.).

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?

Provides explicit usage context: 'Call this before create_appointment to find a valid PractitionerId.' This tells the agent exactly when to use it. It lacks explicit alternatives or when-not-to-use, but the scenario is very concrete.

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