ingest_health_documents

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 mentions that the tool 'Extracts medications, lab results, diagnoses, and allergies automatically using AI,' which discloses the AI extraction behavior. However, it lacks details on auth requirements, error handling, or any potential side effects beyond the extraction.

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 concise with two main sentences and an Args section. It is front-loaded with the primary action and contains no superfluous information.

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 tool has only one required parameter, no output schema, and sibling tools are all read/analysis tools, the description sufficiently explains the tool's purpose, input, and AI extraction behavior. It does not need to detail return values since no output schema is specified.

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?

The input schema has 0% description coverage, but the description includes an 'Args' section for file_path with the explanation 'Absolute path to the PDF or image file to ingest.' This adds meaningful semantics beyond the schema's 'File Path' label.

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 'ingest' and the resource 'health documents (PDF or image)' into the MedMemory database. It distinguishes from sibling tools like check_drug_interaction or generate_health_summary, which are read/analysis tools, not ingestion.

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 explicitly says 'Use this when the user wants to add a prescription, lab report, or any medical document to their health record.' This provides clear context for when to use the tool, though it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or alternatives.

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