garmin_devices

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It never explicitly states that this is a read-only list/retrieval operation, nor does it mention authentication, caching, or side effects. The noun-phrase form leaves the actual behavior inferred rather than disclosed.

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?

One short sentence with no filler; the resource is named first and the purpose is appended compactly. Every word earns its place.

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 output schema and zero parameters cover the return contract, and the push-context is helpful. However, with no annotations the absence of an explicit statement of what the tool actually does (retrieves/lists) leaves a real gap for an agent deciding whether invocation has side effects.

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 tool has zero parameters and the schema is empty, so there are no parameter semantics to document; the baseline for a 0-parameter tool is 4. The description adds relevant real-world meaning by explaining that the IDs are prerequisites for pushing a workout.

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 resource is named specifically: registered Garmin devices and their IDs, which clearly sets it apart from the many Garmin metrics/workout siblings. It lacks an explicit action verb like 'list' or 'get', so it does not fully meet the 5-level standard.

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 parenthetical '(needed to push a workout)' gives a clear use case: call this when you need a Garmin device ID for a push operation. It does not name alternatives or state when not to use it, but the intended context is evident.

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