icu_get_wellness_data

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description still adds two useful behavioral facts beyond that: the default 7-day window and the guarantee that this tool always returns a multi-day list rather than a single record. Output format details are left to the output schema, which is fine.

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 core behavior and default are front-loaded in the first clause, followed by use cases, then the two sibling disambiguations. Every sentence carries information; none is filler or repetition.

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 an output schema present, rich annotations, and full parameter documentation, the description only needs to cover scope, routing, and the default range — all of which it does. Nothing an agent needs to invoke this 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 coverage is 100%, so both parameters (days_back, athlete_id) are already documented. The description only restates the default of 7 days, which the schema's default field already conveys, and adds nothing about the athlete_id scoping beyond what the schema says. Baseline 3 applies when the schema carries parameter semantics.

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?

States a specific verb+resource (fetch wellness records) with an explicit scope (range of recent days, default last 7). It names the two most confusable siblings (icu_get_fitness_chart and icu_get_wellness_for_date) and states what distinguishes this tool from each, so an agent can select it without opening any schema.

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?

Gives concrete use cases (trends, weekly summaries, 'how has my sleep been this week?', recovery curves) plus explicit routing rules: fitness chart series go to icu_get_fitness_chart, a single date goes to icu_get_wellness_for_date. Both the when-to-use and when-not-to-use conditions are stated.

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