garmin_daily_summary

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that this is an aggregate rollup of multiple metrics, which is useful, but it does not clarify date defaults, timezone handling, or the fact that only one day is returned beyond the word 'daily'.

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 a single concise phrase with a clear metric list and no filler. It is appropriately front-loaded, though it is so brief that it misses opportunities to convey usage or parameter details without becoming bloated.

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?

An output schema exists, so return-value coverage is not needed. However, the description leaves date semantics undocumented and provides no guidance among the many sibling metrics tools, making it minimally adequate for a one-parameter read-only tool but with clear gaps.

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%, and the description does not explain the 'date' parameter's format, meaning, or default behavior. While 'whole-day' hints that the date selects the day, the agent is left to guess whether the date is ISO-formatted, localized, or required for a specific summary.

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 ('whole-day wellness rollup') and lists the included metrics, so an agent can tell it aggregates daily wellness data rather than one metric. It is not a tautology and is distinguishable from granular siblings like garmin_steps or garmin_stress, though it lacks an explicit verb like 'get'.

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?

The phrase 'whole-day wellness rollup' implies use when the agent wants a consolidated daily overview rather than a single metric, but it never explicitly states when to choose this over granular siblings or how it complements tools like garmin_sleep or garmin_body_battery. No exclusions or alternatives are mentioned.

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