Enterprise cloud agents increasingly operate over thousands of APIs and SDK operations. Tool use therefore becomes a large-scale classification and grounding problem over API operations, not a simple function-calling task. Earlier production-derived architectures either expose broad operation catalogs to the model or hide selection inside planner agents, causing excessive context growth, repeated discovery calls, and preventable invocation errors. We propose the Operation-Visible Agent Architecture, which keeps operation search, schema inspection, validation feedback, and API invocation visible to a centralized ReAct loop through a deterministic Operation-Resolver MCP. We compare this architecture with lead-worker planning and ReAct-based execution variants to assess how agent orchestration and MCP tool-boundary design affect enterprise-agent performance. On internal cloud-management benchmark tasks spanning 280+ SDK clients and approximately 8K operations, the proposed architecture improves full-success rate from 68% to 77% over the production-derived baseline, while reducing total token usage by 54.1%, median latency by 43.3%, LLM calls by 37.8%, and tool errors by 52.4%. The main lesson is that, at enterprise API scale, tool-boundary design is not an implementation detail: parallel tool calling improves efficiency, but task success improves most when operation resolution remains visible to the main reasoning loop.

Medical doctors spend on average 52 to 102 minutes per day writing clinical notes from their patient encounters (Hripcsak et al., 2011). Reducing this workload calls for relevant and efficient summarization methods. In this paper, we introduce new resources and empirical investigations for the automatic summarization of doctor-patient conversations in a clinical setting. In particular, we introduce the MTS-Dialog dataset; a new collection of 1,700 doctor-patient dialogues and corresponding clinical notes. We use this new dataset to investigate the feasibility of this task and the relevance of existing language models, data augmentation, and guided summarization techniques. We compare standard evaluation metrics based on n-gram matching, contextual embeddings, and Fact Extraction to assess the accuracy and the factual consistency of the generated summaries. To ground these results, we perform an expert-based evaluation using relevant natural language generation criteria and task-specific criteria such as critical omissions, and study the correlation between the automatic metrics and expert judgments. To the best of our knowledge, this study is the first attempt to introduce an open dataset of doctor-patient conversations and clinical notes, with detailed automated and manual evaluations of clinical note generation.