Fetch heart-rate samples plus resting, min, and max heart rate for a given date. Use it to track daily cardiovascular health from Garmin Connect.
Heart-rate samples plus resting, min and max heart rate for one date.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| cdate | Yes | Calendar date, YYYY-MM-DD (UTC) |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
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 description adds useful content about returned values (samples plus resting, min and max), but does not disclose pagination, rate limits, or response format beyond what annotations and schema imply.
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, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It efficiently communicates the main return content and scope.
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 exists, so the description must characterize return values; it does so by naming sample-level data and resting/min/max summaries. Some detail about sample granularity or response shape is absent, but for a simple single-date read it is close to complete.
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% and the single parameter is fully documented as a YYYY-MM-DD UTC date. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.
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?
States a specific resource (heart-rate samples plus resting, min and max heart rate) and scope (one date). It is clear what the tool returns, but it does not explicitly name or contrast with siblings such as get_heart_rate_zones or get_rhr_daily.
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 gives no when-to-use guidance or alternatives. It implies retrieval for a calendar date but does not explain when to choose this tool over other heart-rate or resting-heart-rate siblings.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.