列出可预约专家

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

With no annotations provided, the description fails to mention behavioral traits such as read-only nature, authentication requirements, or what 'available' means. It only states the basic operation, leaving significant gaps.

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 a single efficient sentence that conveys the core functionality. It is appropriately front-loaded and concise, though slightly more structure could improve clarity.

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 tool has no output schema and the description does not explain return format or provide context on pagination, empty results, or error states. Given the lack of annotations and minimal description, the completeness is insufficient for an agent to use effectively.

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 description explains two of three parameters (hospitalId, departmentId) implicitly. However, registerType is not mentioned at all, and schema coverage is 0%. The description adds some value but does not fully compensate for the undocumented parameter.

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 returns available experts based on hospital and department, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like list_expert_slots, which returns slots for a given expert, and other appointment tools, making its purpose clear.

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 implies usage by specifying inputs (hospital, department) but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like list_expert_slots or register tools. No exclusions or contextual triggers are provided.

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