Weight & body composition

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

Annotations already establish read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior, so the description's job is to add context — and it does: it discloses the unit convention (Garmin reports grams, divide by 1000) and the automatic chunking with a 366-day cap. Those are non-obvious traits an agent could not get from annotations or schema.

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: the first delivers scope, output fields and the critical unit conversion; the second delivers the range constraint. Nothing is redundant and the key caveat is front-loaded.

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 compensates by naming the returned metrics and warning about gram units, which is what an agent most needs to interpret results. Ordering, pagination shape and what happens on days without a weigh-in are left unstated, keeping it just short of fully complete.

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%, so the schema already explains inclusive date bounds and accepted formats ('today', 'N days ago'). The description adds only the long-range chunking/366-day constraint, so baseline 3 applies.

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 resource (every weigh-in in the range) and enumerates the metrics returned (BMI, body fat, muscle mass, water), which clearly separates it from siblings like garmin_get_weight_goals or garmin_get_day. It never names a sibling explicitly, so it is clear but not sibling-routing.

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?

'Use for bulk/cut progress' gives one concrete use case, which implies the context for calling it. There is no guidance on when to prefer this over garmin_get_day or garmin_get_weight_goals, and no exclusions.

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