search_patients_by_name

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states it 'searches' and returns a dictionary, omitting details like search behavior (partial math, case sensitivity), pagination, or safety (read-only nature).

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 very short and uses a structured Args/Returns format. Every sentence adds value, but it could be slightly more detailed without losing conciseness.

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 complexity of patient search and many sibling tools, the description is incomplete. It does not explain result structure (beyond 'dictionary'), search behavior, or how it differs from other search_patients_by_* tools. An output schema exists, but the description still needs to clarify the search semantics.

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 must add meaning. It gives one-line descriptions for given_name and family_name, which clarifies their purpose beyond the schema. However, it does not specify constraints like minimum length or character sets.

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 searches for patients by name using FHIR search parameters, which is a specific verb and resource. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like search_patients_by_address or search_patients_by_birthdate.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description lacks any mention of use cases, prerequisites, or exclusions.

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