import_fit

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

Without annotations, the description carries full behavioral burden. It discloses that existing API-sourced rows are never overwritten, which is a key safety trait. However, it does not mention error handling, validation, or what happens on success.

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, front-loaded with the primary action, and each sentence adds value. No redundancy or fluff.

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 one parameter, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers core purpose and a key behavior. However, it lacks details on error handling, file size limits, and confirmation of success. It's functional but not exhaustive.

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 coverage is 0%, so description must compensate. It adds meaning by specifying the folder contains .fit files and is a Garmin FIT bundle. However, it does not clarify path format or requirements, but for a single parameter this is adequate.

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 verb 'Import' and the resource 'manually exported Garmin wellness FIT bundle (folder of .fit files)'. It distinguishes from siblings like 'sync' by specifying manual export and zero-auth offline ingest.

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 implies when to use: when you have a manually exported Garmin FIT bundle. It doesn't explicitly exclude alternatives, but the context of manual ingest and zero-auth sets it apart from sibling tools like 'sync' and 'sync_status'.

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