get_body_battery

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

Annotations are absent, so the description must carry the full behavioral disclosure burden. It only states that the tool retrieves body battery data with events; it does not disclose read-only behavior, event semantics, date-range constraints, or any rate/limit considerations. 'Get' implies reading but is not made explicit.

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 ('Get body battery data with events'), and the parameter block is minimal and scannable. It could earn a 5 if the space saved by brevity were used to clarify the relationship with the similarly named sibling 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?

Although an output schema exists and the parameter list is simple, the definition is not complete enough for reliable tool selection in this large sibling set. The overlap with get_body_battery_events is unexplained, no annotations fill in behavior, and key usage constraints are absent.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It does add the YYYY-MM-DD date format for both start_date and end_date, which the schema does not provide. However, it omits range semantics such as inclusivity, timezone handling, or maximum allowed span, so compensation is partial.

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 names a specific resource, body battery data, with a clear verb 'Get' and mentions events. However, it does not distinguish this tool from the similarly named sibling get_body_battery_events, which creates potential selection ambiguity.

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 about when to choose this tool over alternatives, no exclusions, and no mention of how it relates to get_body_battery_events or other get_* tools. The only content is a parameter list, so the agent is left to infer usage from the name alone.

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