Log metrics

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

Annotations provide minimal safety info (not read-only, not destructive). The description adds no additional behavioral context such as whether logging replaces existing metrics for the same date, whether it confirms the operation, or any side effects. Important side effects remain undisclosed.

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 a single concise sentence that immediately conveys the tool's primary action. No wasted words or redundant information.

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 10 parameters, no output schema, and sparse annotations, the description does not provide enough context for an agent to understand whether logging is additive, how the 'athlete' parameter works with coach accounts, or what a successful log returns. It is too shallow for a tool of this complexity.

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?

Schema description coverage is only 30% (date, injury, athlete have descriptions). The description mentions examples like weight, HRV, sleep, steps but does not add units, ranges, or relationships, failing to compensate for the low schema coverage.

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 the specific verb 'Log' with the resource 'health metrics' and scope 'for a date', clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like tp_get_metrics which read metrics.

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 implies the tool is for recording health metrics for a date, but it does not explicitly state when to use it over alternatives, mention exclusions, or provide prerequisites for coach accounts. Usage is implied rather than clearly guided.

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