get_stress_summary

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

With no annotations, the description carries the disclosure burden. It usefully reveals the lightweight behavior and approximate response size (~400 bytes vs ~35KB), but it does not disclose what 'essential metrics' are included, potential limitations, or error behavior. Some behavioral context is provided, but richer details are absent.

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, front-loaded with the tool's purpose, and includes only necessary details. The payload size comparison and use-case note earn their place, and the Args section is direct and readable.

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?

Given the tool has only one parameter, an output schema, and low complexity, the description covers the main selection concerns. It could be slightly more specific about what metrics are included or which sibling tool provides the full time-series data, but overall it is adequately complete.

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 input schema provides no description for the 'date' parameter, so the description's 'Date in YYYY-MM-DD format' adds essential meaning beyond the schema. This fully clarifies the only parameter's expected format, though it adds no other parameter context.

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 clearly states the function: 'Get stress summary with essential metrics (lightweight version)'. It distinguishes itself from full time-series stress data by emphasizing the compact summary representation, which separates it from sibling tools like get_stress_data.

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 clear usage context: 'Ideal for daily health checkups and LLM integrations' and contrasts it with returning full time-series data. It does not explicitly name alternative tools or state when not to use it, but the guidance is sufficient for selection.

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