fhir_search

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

No annotations are provided, so the description alone must disclose behavioral traits. It only states the return type but omits whether the operation is read-only, what happens on no results, rate limits, or authentication requirements. This is insufficient for a search operation.

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 extremely concise with two short sentences. Every word is necessary and front-loaded. No redundant or vague language.

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 no annotations, the description could have provided more context about return values (e.g., bundle structure) or usage examples. However, the schema is rich and fully covers parameters, partially compensating. The description is minimally complete for a straightforward search tool.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The tool description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema—it does not explain the 'params' object format or provide examples. The description is adequate but does not enhance parameter understanding.

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 'Search a FHIR R4 resource type' with a specific verb and resource. It also specifies the return type as 'FHIR Bundle (searchset)'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like fhir_read (single resource) and fhir_search_next (pagination).

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like fhir_read or fhir_search_next. It fails to mention use cases, exclusions, or prerequisites such as required authentication or server capabilities.

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