Center details

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive), and the description layers on non-obvious behavior: the auth/SMS requirement for booking, the fact that office-type doctors lack a center page, and that returned entries carry `consultation_id` and doctor hash ids that feed specific sibling tools.

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?

Front-loaded with the resource's contents, then the practical routing notes. Dense and slightly telegraphic in the opening enumeration, but nearly every clause carries information the agent needs to chain calls.

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?

Although an output schema exists, the description still highlights the output fields that matter for orchestration (consultation_id, doctor hash ids, earliest free slot), plus the exclusions and prerequisite. Nothing needed to select or call this tool is missing.

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 100% and both parameters are fully documented there, including the hash-or-URL format and the default/cap on `doctors`. The description adds only indirect cues (mentions of hash ids and consultation ids), so the baseline 3 applies.

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 names the resource (a center's page) and enumerates exactly what it returns: address, coordinates, departments, services, insurances, attributes, opening hours, lab admission rules, bookable services and doctors. It explicitly carves out what it is NOT for ('Doctor private offices (type office) have no center page: use dt_doctor'), cleanly separating it from the sibling.

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?

Explicit alternatives and conditions: use dt_doctor for office-type practitioners, and the follow-up chain is spelled out ('Next: dt_free_slots, dt_doctor, dt_reviews(of="center")'). It also surfaces a prerequisite the agent must relay to the user (booking needs an SMS login).

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