get_daily_weigh_ins

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The URL does implicitly reveal a fixed `includeAll=true` query behavior not present in the schema, but it is never explained (what 'all' includes, timezone handling, whether it aggregates multiple weigh-ins). Little behavioral value beyond the 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?

It is short, but brevity here reflects under-specification rather than concision. A single URL slug is not a useful structure for an agent deciding whether to invoke the tool.

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 single-parameter read tool the schema and annotations carry most of the load, but the description omits anything that would distinguish it from `get_weigh_ins` or explain what the day-view result contains. An agent has almost no basis for choosing between the two weigh-in readers.

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 description coverage is 100%, so `cdate` (YYYY-MM-DD, UTC) is fully documented by the schema; baseline 3 applies. The description adds no syntax or semantic detail about the date, and the hidden `includeAll` flag it exposes is left unexplained rather than clarified.

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 is a bare REST path (`GET /weight-service/weight/dayview/{cdate}`) rather than a statement of purpose. An agent can infer that it reads weigh-ins for a date, but only by parsing a URL, and it gives no indication of how this differs from the sibling `get_weigh_ins`.

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?

There is no guidance whatsoever about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as `get_weigh_ins`. The raw endpoint string carries no context, no prerequisites, and no exclusions.

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