Wellness Onboarding Flow

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true. Description adds that it is read-only and does not persist, reinforcing the safety profile. Also discloses cross-connector profile sharing, a key behavioral detail beyond 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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with purpose and read-only note, then pairing guidance and cross-connector context. Efficient, no extraneous text. 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?

No output schema, but description explains return value (onboarding flow, profile state, missing fields). Also covers cross-connector sharing and required pairing. With 2 optional params and clear intent, the description is sufficiently complete for agent understanding.

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 coverage is 50% (2 params both with schema descriptions). Description does not add additional parameter semantics beyond what the input schema already provides (locale defaults, response_format enum). Baseline score of 3 is appropriate as the schema carries the burden.

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?

Description clearly states the tool returns the 11-question onboarding flow, current profile state, and missing fields. It explicitly notes read-only behavior. Distinguishes from siblings like google_health_profile_get (profile only) and google_health_profile_update (update) through pairing guidance.

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?

Description explicitly pairs with google_health_profile_update once answers are provided, giving clear usage context. It also notes cross-connector profile sharing, helping agents understand integration. Lacks explicit when-not-to-use, but pairing guidance is strong.

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