get_patient_profile

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

Without annotations, the description relies on the verb '获取' to convey a read operation. It discloses the profile's contents but does not address potential nuances like auth requirements, data freshness, or error behavior. Since an output schema exists, return formatting is likely covered elsewhere.

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 entire description is a single, compact sentence with an enumerated list, front-loading the key action ('get complete profile') and using no filler words.

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?

For a single-parameter read tool with an output schema, the description sufficiently outlines the profile's scope. However, it lacks any note on access restrictions or relationship to other tools, leaving some contextual gaps that annotations might otherwise fill.

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%, and the description only loosely references '某患儿' without elaborating on the patient_id format or requirements. Although the parameter name is self-explanatory, the description provides minimal added semantic value beyond the schema.

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 fetches a complete patient profile and explicitly enumerates the contained data (age, weight, CKD stage, dialysis, allergens, dietary culture, 3-day diary overview), distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_diet_diary or get_labs.

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 use when a holistic patient view is needed, but provides no explicit guidance on when to choose this over sibling tools or any exclusions. It does not mention prerequisites or alternative conditions.

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