get_stress_data

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the response size (~35KB), that it returns interval-level detail, and that body battery is included. These are meaningful behavioral traits beyond the schema. It does not discuss errors or availability, but for a simple read operation with an output schema this is reasonably transparent.

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 compact, front-loaded with the core purpose, and includes only useful additions: data size, contents, and a pointer to the summary alternative. The Args section is minimal and directly relevant.

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 one-parameter read tool with an output schema, this description covers the purpose, the parameter format, the payload size, and the main alternative. Nothing essential for an agent to select and call it correctly 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It does so by specifying the date format ('YYYY-MM-DD') and implying the date identifies the day for which stress data is returned. This adds real meaning beyond the schema's bare 'date' string property.

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 and resource: 'Get full stress time-series data.' It also distinguishes itself from get_stress_summary by noting it returns detailed interval data including body battery, so an agent can tell it apart from the closest sibling without ambiguity.

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?

It explicitly provides an alternative and the condition for choosing it: 'For a compact summary, use get_stress_summary().' This gives clear when-to-use guidance relative to the primary sibling and implies this tool should be used when full detail is needed.

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