search_patients_by_phone

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility. It fails to disclose whether the search is exact or fuzzy, whether it returns multiple matches, or any limitations on phone number format. The minimal description lacks behavioral detail.

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 short, consisting of one sentence and a structured Args/Returns section. While not verbose, it omits crucial details and could be better organized to include more actionable 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 simplicity of the tool (single parameter, search operation) and the presence of an output schema, the description is minimally adequate. However, it lacks completeness regarding search behavior and result format, which could be expected for a search 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?

The schema has one parameter with no description. The description adds 'Patient's phone number', which only slightly clarifies the parameter's meaning. It does not provide format expectations, examples, or constraints, so the added value is limited.

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's function: 'Search for patients by phone number.' It uses a specific verb and resource, distinguishing it from sibling tools that search by other attributes (e.g., name, email, address).

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 offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that it should be used when a patient's phone number is known, nor does it exclude scenarios like partial matches or international formats. Contextual cues from siblings are absent.

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