withings_get_weight

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. 'Fetch' signals a read operation and 'meastype 1' documents the internal filter, which is useful. However, it does not disclose output shape, pagination behavior, or any rate-limit or side-effect caveats; for a simple read tool this is minimally sufficient but not rich.

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 one short, front-loaded sentence that states the core purpose, with a brief contextual note about the source device. Every word earns its place and there is no padding.

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 simple read-only tool with zero required parameters and fully documented schemas, the essentials are covered. The main missing context is a brief routing note that explains when to prefer this tool over the many sibling measurement tools.

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 100% for all three optional parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no per-parameter meaning beyond what the schema already provides, though the fixed 'meastype 1' detail is relevant context for interpreting what the parameters affect.

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 names a clear verb ('Fetch') and resource ('scale weight measurements'), and anchors it to Withings meastype 1. This is enough to distinguish it from siblings like blood pressure, heart rate, or temperature tools, though it does not explicitly contrast it with the broader withings_get_measurements sibling.

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives. 'Typical source: Withings scale' provides a little context, but there are no exclusions, no conditions, and no mention of sibling tools such as get_body_composition or get_measurements. An agent must infer usage entirely from the name and short description.

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