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

Annotations already declare read-only and open-world behavior. The description adds that this is a duplicate alias with the same URL as `getAllDayStress`, which is useful behavioral context, but it does not describe rate limits, auth needs, or return shape.

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?

The description is appropriately short and front-loads the alias relationship. The second sentence partially restates the first, but the total length is minimal and not wasteful enough to harm usability.

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 simple alias tool with a fully described schema and read-only annotations, the description provides enough context to understand that it duplicates `getAllDayStress`. No output schema exists, so return values need not be explained.

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 100%, so the single `cdate` parameter is already fully documented as a YYYY-MM-DD UTC date. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond the schema, making the baseline 3 appropriate.

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 states the tool is an alias of `getAllDayStress` with an identical URL, which implies retrieving all-day stress data and distinguishes it as a duplicate endpoint. It is clear in context, though it does not independently state the verb and resource without relying on knowledge of 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?

The description says it is an alias but gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus `get_all_day_stress` or whether one should be preferred. The only implied usage is interchangeability, which is not explicit.

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