get_body_battery_events

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but it only says 'Get' and repeats the resource name. It does not mention whether this returns raw or processed events, whether any normalization occurs, or any rate limits or data availability constraints.

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 extremely concise, front-loads the operation, and includes only the essential parameter detail. Every element earns its place with no redundant filler.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values are presumably covered. Still, the description is minimal: it lacks any context about what 'body battery events' actually are, how they differ from get_body_battery, or when to use this tool. It is minimally viable but leaves an agent to guess.

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?

There is only one parameter, and the description adds the important 'YYYY-MM-DD' format that the input schema does not provide. This compensates for the 0% schema coverage, though it does not explain what date range or timezone semantics apply.

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') and resource ('body battery events data'), making the core operation clear. However, it does not explain what differentiates 'events' from the sibling get_body_battery tool, so it is slightly less distinct than ideal.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_body_battery or get_all_day_events. It does not state any exclusions, prerequisites, or conditions that would help an agent choose this tool.

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