get_all_day_events

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral burden. It does convey meaningful behavior: the tool returns a chronological aggregate of multiple event types for a single day. However, it does not state safety/read-only status, auth expectations, or edge behavior around date/time zones, which would be more transparent without annotations.

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 main behavior is front-loaded in one clear sentence, and the parameter documentation is compact and useful. There is no filler or repetition of the schema.

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 simple one-parameter read-style tool with an output schema present, the description is nearly complete. The main missing piece is guidance about when to choose this tool over sibling daily or timeline tools; otherwise the agent has enough to call it correctly.

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%, but the description compensates for the single parameter by specifying the date format (YYYY-MM-DD) and the default behavior ('Defaults to today'). This adds real meaning beyond the bare schema property, though it could still clarify timezone handling for 'today'.

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 is clear: it lists a resource ('Garmin events during the day') and covers the event categories (activities, naps, sleep, stress events). It does not explicitly contrast itself with similarly named siblings like get_daily_summary, get_activities_by_date, or get_sleep, so it misses the extra step of sibling differentiation.

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 gives no direct guidance about when to use this tool instead of alternatives. The broad 'timeline of everything' phrasing implies an aggregate use case, but there is no mention of exclusions or when a more specific sibling such as get_sleep or get_stress would be preferred.

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