register_patient

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

With no annotations, the description fully carries behavioral disclosure. It reveals idempotent behavior (returns existing record with `created: false`), phone number normalization, the non-clinical nature of notes, and the role of dob in distinguishing same-name patients. This gives the agent critical expectations beyond what a schema could provide.

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 well-structured with a clear purpose, workflow guidance, Args section, and example. No filler sentences; each part adds value, and the length is appropriate for the tool's complexity.

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?

The description covers the tool's purpose, workflow (call find_patient first), idempotency, parameter details, and an example. Given the output schema exists, it doesn't need to explain return values beyond the `created: false` flag, which it does. It is complete for an agent to use the tool 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 coverage is 0%, so the description is the only source of parameter meaning. It explains each arg: name, phone (including format normalization), dob (optional, useful for distinguishing patients), and notes (non-clinical). The example call further clarifies usage.

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 tool's function: 'Register a new patient, or return the existing record for that phone number.' It specifies the resource (patient) and the action (register/return), and distinguishes itself from the sibling find_patient by noting it returns existing records rather than just looking them up.

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?

Explicit guidance is provided: 'Call find_patient first' and 'Confirm the spelling of the name and the phone number with the caller before calling this.' This tells the agent when and how to use the tool, including prerequisites and a step to avoid duplicate registrations.

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