get_weight_month

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

Annotations already cover read-only and non-destructive behavior. The description adds useful behavioral context by noting that the records are 'authenticated' and by explaining the date interpretation rule: the whole month containing the given epoch-day is returned. It does not address null-date behavior, but that is not a safety concern.

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?

A single compact sentence that front-loads the verb and resource, with no filler or redundant detail. Every word contributes to understanding the tool's behavior.

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 one-parameter, read-only tool with an output schema provided, the description is nearly complete. The only meaningful gap is that the behavior when 'date' is null is left implicit.

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 0%, but the description compensates by giving meaning to the 'date' parameter: it is an epoch-day used to select a month. It still leaves the null-default case unexplained, so it is not quite a 5.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get') plus a resource ('authenticated weight records') and a precise scope ('for the month containing an epoch-day'). This naturally distinguishes it from sibling tools like search_foods or get_user_food_entries.

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 sentence clearly implies when to use this tool: whenever weight records for a month are needed. However, it gives no explicit guidance about when not to use it or how it relates to alternatives among the sibling tools.

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