Google Health Agent Manifest

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

The description adds behavioral context beyond annotations by clarifying the tool does not call Google Health APIs and does not expose secrets. Annotations already indicate read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description confirms these traits and adds specific safety guarantees, complementing the annotations well.

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 a single concise sentence that is front-loaded with essential information. Every word contributes to understanding the tool's purpose and safety. There is no unnecessary text.

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 tool's simplicity (two optional parameters with enums, output schema present), the description is complete enough. It covers purpose, safety, and non-interaction with Google Health. The rich annotations and output schema provide the remaining context.

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 input schema provides enums and defaults for both parameters (client, response_format), but schema description coverage is 0%. The tool description does not explain the meaning of these parameters or how they affect the manifest output. The enums give some context, but the description adds no additional clarity beyond what is already in 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?

The description clearly states the tool provides machine-readable install, runtime, and client guidance for AI agents. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools that interact with Google Health data by explicitly stating it does not call Google Health or expose secrets. The purpose is specific and unambiguous.

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 implies use for setup or configuration guidance but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like google_health_quickstart or google_health_onboarding. No when-not or exclusion criteria are provided. Usage context is only implicit.

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