Search doctors

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/openWorld/non-destructive, so the safety bar is covered. The description adds genuine behavioral context beyond them: what each result card contains, that online_visit price is only present when offered, and that a null service_id originates from pz_doctor. It stops short of discussing paging limits or result-count behavior, but the added detail is substantive.

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 purpose and filter list, then a second paragraph on result contents and routing. Dense but every sentence carries information; the result-card inventory is somewhat long and partly overlaps the output schema, keeping it from a 5.

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 12-param, zero-required search tool with annotations and an output schema present, the description covers purpose, filter semantics, a known limitation, handoff ids for downstream slot tools, and next-step routing. Nothing an agent needs to call it correctly 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%, so the schema already documents all 12 params and the baseline is 3. The description adds meaning by summarizing the filterable dimensions and explicitly recording a negative constraint (no insurance filter) plus the null service_id provenance note, which goes beyond what the schema states.

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?

Opens with a specific verb and resource ('Search Paziresh24 doctors (or hospitals and clinics)') and enumerates the filter dimensions (city, specialty, name, online visit, gender, degree). The parenthetical covering hospitals/clinics and the explicit naming of sibling tools makes it easy to distinguish from pz_doctor and pz_center.

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?

Explicitly routes the agent: 'Next: pz_doctor for the full profile, pz_first_available, or pz_free_days / pz_free_slots with the ids of a card's center.' It also flags a real constraint exclusions-style ('There is no insurance filter: check insurances yourself'), so the agent knows what NOT to expect from this tool.

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