openemr-mcp

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses the temporal scope ('upcoming' vs. past appointments) but lacks critical details: the time range (30 days? 6 months?), result limits, whether results include cancelled appointments, and safety/classification info (read-only nature implied but not stated).

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?

Extremely efficient at 6 words. Every term earns its place—no filler, tautology, or redundant structure. Front-loaded with the action and resource.

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 low complexity (single string parameter, no nested objects) and complete schema coverage, the description is minimally adequate. However, lacking annotations and an output schema, it omits important context like pagination, result ordering, and the specific definition of 'upcoming'.

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 100% schema description coverage, the parameter is well-documented in the schema itself ('OpenEMR patient ID'). The description adds implicit context linking 'for a patient' to the patient_id parameter but provides no additional format guidance or examples beyond the schema.

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?

Clear verb ('List') and resource ('upcoming appointments') with patient scope. However, it does not distinguish from sibling tool 'openemr_visit_prep' which may also involve appointments, nor define the time window for 'upcoming'.

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?

Provides no guidance on when to use this versus alternatives like 'openemr_visit_prep', nor prerequisites such as needing a valid patient_id from 'openemr_patient_search'.

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