garmin_personal_records

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. The word "Get" and the stated return contents imply a read-only retrieval, but there is no explicit disclosure of permissions, rate limits, pagination, or failure behavior.

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 short and front-loaded, with the core purpose stated first and the parameter explanation after. The repeated enum values are somewhat redundant with the schema, but overall it remains efficient.

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 tool with no output schema, the description gives enough context to call it correctly: it identifies the records returned and explains the only filter. More detail about output structure or ordering could help, but the core invocation requirements are covered.

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 single sport parameter has no schema description, but the description compensates by explaining that it restricts results to one discipline and listing the allowed values. The enum in the schema duplicates the values, but the description adds the restricting meaning.

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 verb and resource: get personal records, and adds that each record includes the activity it was set in. This clearly distinguishes the tool from list-oriented siblings, though it does not explicitly name alternatives.

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 explains only the sport filter, not when an agent should choose this tool over siblings like garmin_activities or garmin_activity_detail. No exclusions or alternative-selection guidance are provided.

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