get_stress_data

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It adds useful context beyond the basic 'get' semantics: the response is detailed interval data, approximately 35KB, and includes body battery. This helps an agent anticipate payload size and content, though it does not disclose potential errors or rate limits.

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 with the main purpose, then adds a concise note about payload size and the summary alternative, followed by the parameter format. Every sentence contributes useful information with no waste.

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?

The tool is simple with one required parameter, and an output schema exists to cover return values. The description provides the date format and an explicit alternative. It does not mention other stress-related siblings like get_all_day_stress or get_weekly_stress, but the core information needed to select and call this tool is present.

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 says 'date' is a string, with 0% description coverage. The description compensates fully by specifying the exact expected format: 'Date in YYYY-MM-DD format.' For a single-parameter tool, this is sufficient.

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 clear verb and resource: 'Get full stress time-series data.' It also distinguishes itself from get_stress_summary by describing this as detailed interval data, so an agent can differentiate the full-data tool from the compact-summary sibling.

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 explicitly says 'For a compact summary, use get_stress_summary().' This gives a direct alternative and the condition under which that alternative should be chosen, which is exactly the guidance needed for tool selection.

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