get_sleep

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It clearly discloses that the tool returns sleep duration, stages, and score, which tells the agent what output to expect. It does not mention timezone handling, data availability, or authentication, but for a simple read operation these are minor gaps.

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?

Two sentences with no filler. The first sentence establishes the action and parameter format, and the second lists the return values. Every word earns its place, and the description is well front-loaded with the primary purpose.

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 description is sufficient for a simple one-parameter read tool with an output schema present. It conveys the resource, date format, and return content. Slight gaps remain in explaining when to use it relative to siblings and clarifying units/timezone, but the output schema likely covers return structure.

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 0%, and the schema only provides 'date' as a string type. The description compensates by specifying the exact format ('YYYY-MM-DD'), which is the crucial semantic detail. It does not explain date range constraints or timezone context, but for a single parameter it provides the most important missing meaning.

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 a specific verb ('Get'), a specific resource ('sleep data'), and the required date format ('YYYY-MM-DD'). It names the exact content returned (duration, stages, score), making the tool's purpose unambiguous and distinct from health-related siblings such as get_hrv or get_daily_summary.

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 usage by naming the resource and date, but there is no explicit guidance on when to choose this tool over alternatives or when not to use it. With 29 sibling tools covering different health metrics, some exclusion or alternative would improve selection, but the resource-specific name and description provide enough context for an agent to infer applicability.

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