get_sleep

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so safety is covered; the description adds genuine domain context, explaining what the payload contains (bed/wake local times, stages, efficiency, naps, death, and the SRI scale of -100..100 where 100 means identical daily timing). It stops short of describing authentication, pagination, or timezone handling.

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, front-loaded with what you get and followed by how to scope it. The heavy parentheticals are dense but each clause carries information; nothing is filler.

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?

With no output schema, the description correctly spends its space describing the returned fields and the SRI semantics, and it documents the default window and parameter interaction. Complete enough to call correctly, with only the date-format detail 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 carries the burden and does well: it explains days=N, that the window ends at end (default today), the 7-day default, and the start/days mutual exclusion. It does not specify the accepted date format for start or end, which is the remaining gap.

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 names a specific resource (sleep nights, scores, subscores, debt, SRI) and enumerates the data returned, so an agent can distinguish it from siblings like get_activity or get_trends. It lacks an explicit verb, but the scope is clear and concrete.

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 gives real usage rules for the parameters — default 7 days, days=N ending at end, and that days must not be combined with start — but says nothing about when to prefer this tool over sibling tools such as get_overview or get_trends. Usage is implied by the default window rather than stated vs alternatives.

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