get_appointments

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full behavioral disclosure. It states that unfiltered calls return everything and advises passing at least one filter for a busy clinic, defines the date as clinic-local, and enumerates valid statuses. It doesn't mention pagination or result limits, but the output schema covers return structure.

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?

Every sentence earns its place: main action, use cases, filter warning, parameter explanations, and an example. It is front-loaded and free of fluff.

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 output schema exists and the tool is a query/list operation, the description covers action, filter combinations, usage contexts, parameter provenance, and the unfiltered-query caveat. This is sufficient for an agent to select and invoke correctly.

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 covers 0% of parameter semantics; the description compensates fully. It explains each parameter: patient_id from find_patient, doctor_id from list_doctors, date format 'YYYY-MM-DD', and status enum. A concrete example ties the parameters together.

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?

Description opens with 'List appointments, filtered by any combination of patient, doctor, date and status', which is a specific verb+resource+scope. It distinguishes itself from siblings by explicitly stating it finds the appointment_id needed by reschedule_appointment and cancel_appointment, and supports reviewing a doctor's day.

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 clear contexts: answering 'when is my appointment?', finding appointment_id for reschedule/cancel, reviewing a doctor's day. It also warns that with no filters it returns everything. However, it does not explicitly exclude alternatives like check_availability for open slots, so it lacks explicit when-not guidance.

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