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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds 'Read-only' plus a GraphQL query snippet, which is consistent but not substantial. It does not disclose additional side effects, pagination limits, or auth requirements, but the annotation covers the safety profile.

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 two concise sentences covering purpose, scoping, read-only nature, and the underlying query. Every clause contributes information, with no filler or redundancy.

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 list operation with four optional parameters, the description explains the resource type, optional filters, and read-only behavior. While there is no output schema, the purpose and usage are sufficiently clear for an agent to invoke the tool correctly.

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?

The schema covers 100% of parameters with descriptive explanations, so the baseline is 3. The description's mention of client/category scoping aligns with the schema, and the GraphQL line lists parameter names but adds little beyond the existing schema descriptions.

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 specifies the exact operation ('List tracked metric entries') with concrete examples (weight, blood pressure) and optional scoping, distinguishing it from sibling list tools like healthie_list_appointments. The GraphQL query further confirms the resource and action.

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?

It states the tool is optionally scoped to a client or category, providing clear context for when to use filters. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or when not to use this tool, so it lacks exclusions.

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