Get Google Health Profile

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds the authentication scope requirement, which is useful but not extensive. No contradictions with annotations.

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 extremely concise—two short sentences with no unnecessary words. It front-loads the action and resource, and every sentence adds value.

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, rich annotations, and the presence of an output schema, the description covers the core behavioral context (auth scope) adequately. Minor gaps like error handling or return format are mitigated by other structured fields.

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 detailed descriptions for both parameters ('privacy_mode' and 'response_format'), so schema coverage is high. The description does not add any additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides, warranting a baseline score of 3.

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 explicitly states 'Get authenticated user profile details from Google Health', clearly specifying the action (get) and the resource (user profile). The title reinforces this. Although sibling tools like 'google_health_get_identity' and 'google_health_profile_get' exist, the description's direct language distinguishes it effectively.

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 notes 'Requires profile scope', a key prerequisite, but offers no guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives like 'google_health_profile_get' or 'google_health_get_identity'. No exclusions or contextual use cases are provided.

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