get_sleep_summary

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the disclosure burden. It clearly states that the tool returns a compact summary (~350 bytes) and intentionally omits full granular data, setting accurate expectations about output size and granularity. It does not enumerate which metrics are included, but the presence of an output schema mitigates that gap.

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 compact and front-loaded: the opening sentence names the tool's purpose and distinguishing trait, followed by a concise use-case justification and a clear Args line. No word is wasted.

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?

With one parameter, a clear use case, an explicit contrast to the full data alternative, and an output schema available, the description is largely complete for selecting and invoking the tool. Minor omissions like error behavior for dates with no sleep data are not critical for a simple read-only summary endpoint.

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 schema only defines 'date' as a string with 0% description coverage. The description adds the critical 'YYYY-MM-DD format' requirement, which is necessary for correct invocation and goes beyond what the schema provides.

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 states a specific verb and resource ('Get sleep summary') and immediately distinguishes it with 'lightweight version' and a contrast against 'full granular data' (~50KB). This clearly differentiates it from the sibling get_sleep_data without requiring the agent to inspect schemas.

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 explicit context for when to use this tool: 'Ideal for daily health checkups and LLM integrations' where full time-series data would overwhelm the context window. It implies the alternative is the full data version, though it does not name the sibling tool explicitly or state strong when-not conditions.

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