get_patient_encounters

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 states the tool returns a dictionary of encounters but does not disclose behavioral traits such as pagination, ordering, or potential performance implications for large datasets. As a read operation, lack of side effects is assumed but not confirmed.

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 and structured with Args and Returns sections. The purpose is front-loaded in the first sentence. It efficiently conveys necessary information without extra verbosity.

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 an output schema (not shown) and parameters are well documented, the description covers the essential aspects. It could mention default behavior for filter parameters, but overall it is complete for a retrieval tool.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description effectively adds meaning to each parameter: patient_id is identified as the FHIR patient ID, date is specified with format and optional range, status and encounter_class list valid values. This compensates for the schema's lack of description.

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 it retrieves encounters for a specific patient, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_encounter_by_id which retrieves a single encounter, while this retrieves all encounters for a patient.

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 for retrieving patient encounters with optional filters, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like search functions or other patient-specific tools. No exclusions or alternative guidance provided.

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