get_weigh_ins

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It clearly implies a read-only operation via 'Get', but does not disclose whether dates are inclusive, how timezones are handled, or any limitations. For a simple retrieval tool this is adequate but leaves some behavior unspecified.

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 two concise sentences with an Args list that adds format details beyond the bare schema. It is front-loaded with the primary purpose and contains no filler or redundant clauses.

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?

For a straightforward two-parameter read operation with an output schema present, the description covers the essential invocation details. However, it omits usage context and alternative routing information, leaving the tool slightly under-specified when considered in the context of 100+ siblings.

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 provides only parameter names and types with no descriptions (0% coverage). The description adds crucial semantic context by specifying the expected format (YYYY-MM-DD) and the role of each parameter (start/end date), compensating for the schema gap.

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 ('Get'), a clear resource ('weight measurements'), and a date-range scope ('between specified dates'), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_daily_weigh_ins (daily) and add_weigh_in (writing). The purpose is immediately understandable.

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 use this tool versus alternatives such as get_daily_weigh_ins or get_body_composition. The description only states what it does, not the context that would lead an agent to select it over similar getters.

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