get_acclimation

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It explains field semantics (0-100 scale, decay without exposure, trend labels, previous_* fields), and clarifies what is not included. It could mention altitude-specific fields more explicitly, but overall it adds substantial behavioral context.

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 well-structured and appropriately sized: the main purpose is front-loaded, followed by useful field explanations, an exclusion with alternatives, and the parameter format. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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 single-parameter status retrieval tool with an output schema, the description is complete: it explains what the tool returns, how to interpret key fields, when to use it, what it does not return, and the date format. No critical context is missing.

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 only defines date as a string, but the description specifies the required YYYY-MM-DD format and clarifies that the date selects the acclimation status. This fully compensates for the 0% schema description 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?

Description clearly states the tool retrieves heat and altitude acclimation status for a given date, identifying the specific resource and operation. It further differentiates itself by explicitly noting that VO2 max is not returned and directing users to get_training_status or get_vo2max_trend.

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?

Provides explicit usage context: use heat_acclimation_percent to judge readiness for a warm-weather race, and explicitly excludes VO2 max retrieval, naming alternative tools. This gives an agent clear guidance on when to select this tool versus siblings.

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