Retrieve daily average and maximum stress for a chosen date or today, helping you monitor stress levels and identify peak stress periods.
Average and max stress for one day.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| day | No | YYYY-MM-DD; defaults to today | |
| raw | No | Return Garmin's full JSON instead of a summary |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does 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 the return granularity (average and max over a single day), which is genuine context, but says nothing about data availability, missing-day behavior, or how the summary differs from the raw JSON option.
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 front-loaded sentence with no filler; every word earns its place. It is on the terse side but not padded, and the core metric is stated first.
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 values needn't be explained, but for a health-metric read tool with many overlapping siblings the description gives no guidance on scope, data freshness, or when this is the right endpoint. An agent choosing among get_hrv, get_body_battery, and get_stress has to guess.
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%, with both 'day' (YYYY-MM-DD, defaults to today) and 'raw' fully documented in the schema. The description's phrase 'for one day' loosely echoes the day parameter but adds no format or semantics beyond the schema, so the 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 (stress) and the exact metrics returned (average and max) scoped to one day, so an agent knows precisely what it gets. It does not distinguish itself from health-metric siblings like get_body_battery or get_health_range, which could plausibly include stress data.
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 statement of when to use this versus alternatives, and no prerequisites or exclusions. The day-defaulting behavior is only visible in the schema, not the description.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.