polar_get_sleepwise

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

Annotations already indicate read-only, idempotent, open-world, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds no additional behavioral details such as response size or data availability limitations, but the annotations cover the main safety profile.

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 concise, front-loads the resource and data types, and spends no words on unnecessary detail. It efficiently communicates defaults and the main option.

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?

Given no output schema, the description sufficiently states what data is returned and the key options. It could mention that output format can be markdown or JSON, but that is already covered in the schema. Overall, the description is complete enough for an agent to call the tool correctly.

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?

The schema provides full descriptions and enums for all parameters. The description reinforces the purpose of 'from' and 'hourly', though it does not add much beyond the schema. Since schema coverage is 100%, the baseline is 3; the description adds a small amount of context for 'from' and 'hourly'.

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 states the resource (SleepWise alertness data), the specific data types (alertness grade, classification, sleep inertia), and the optional hourly breakdown. It is distinguishable from sibling tools by naming SleepWise and specific metrics.

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 description explains default behavior (last 28 days) and how to customize with date range or hourly flag. It does not explicitly mention when to use this tool versus siblings like sleep or nightly recharge, but the resource clarity makes the usage context fairly evident.

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