Sleep

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

Annotations already cover the read-only and open-world behavior, lowering the burden on the description. The description adds useful context about date interpretation and return contents, but it does not disclose behavior when date is omitted or what the raw flag changes. There is no contradiction with annotations.

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?

A single focused sentence with no filler. The resource, date semantics, and return categories are front-loaded, making the description efficient and scannable.

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?

The description covers the core resource, date scope, and return categories, and the output schema plus annotations cover return values and safety. However, the raw parameter is undocumented everywhere, and the behavior when no date is supplied is unstated, leaving a notable gap for a tool that accepts zero required parameters.

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 must compensate, but it only clarifies the date parameter ('given date') and leaves raw completely unexplained. An agent cannot infer what raw=true does, and the default behavior for a null date is also not addressed.

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 clearly identifies the resource (sleep) and a precise scope ('night ending on the given date'), and names returned content (stages, score, overnight vitals). It is distinguishable from sibling metric tools like garmin_heart_rate or garmin_steps, though it does not explicitly contrast with garmin_daily_summary.

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 'for the night ending on the given date' gives clear context for when to call this tool. It does not state exclusions or alternatives, but the resource and date semantics make the intended use understandable among the sibling Garmin tools.

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