get_shortlist

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful scope detail about what is returned (profiles, notes, contact history), but says nothing about ordering, pagination, or volume. Adequate but not rich.

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?

One front-loaded sentence that names the verb, resource, and the optional filter with zero filler. Appropriately sized for a simple read tool.

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?

An output schema exists, so return structure need not be explained, and the annotations carry the safety profile. For a one-optional-param read tool the description is close to sufficient; only ordering/pagination and the null-status default are unaddressed.

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 description coverage is 0% and the single 'status' parameter is undocumented beyond its enum. The description confirms the filter dimension ('filtered by status') and that it is optional, but adds no semantics about how multiple statuses combine or what the default (null) returns. Baseline 3 for a light single-param filter.

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?

States a specific verb (List) and a composite resource (saved profiles, local notes, contact history), so an agent knows this returns the user's shortlisted therapists with their associated context. It does not name or differentiate itself from siblings like list_appointments or search_therapists, so the agent must infer the boundary.

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?

'Optionally filtered by status' implies the retrieval use case, but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance and no mention of alternatives (e.g., list_appointments for a schedule view). Usage is only implied.

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