measurements_list_head_circumference

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It only says 'List', which implies read-only, but it does not disclose any other behavioral traits such as return format, pagination, or ordering behavior. It is extremely minimal and leaves the agent to infer basic behavior.

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 sentence with no wasted words. It is appropriately sized for a simple list operation, though it lacks substantive content. It is front-loaded with the core purpose, but nothing more.

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?

For a simple list tool with an output schema and fully documented parameters, the description is marginally adequate. However, it does not mention the default limit or ordering options (even though these are in the schema), and it lacks any usage context relative to the many sibling list tools. An agent could likely call it correctly, but would benefit from more guidance.

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 100%, and each parameter (date, limit, child_id, ordering) has a clear description in the schema. The tool description adds no additional parameter information, so it relies on the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 'List head circumference measurements' clearly states the verb and resource, which is sufficient to identify the tool's purpose. It distinguishes itself from other measurement list tools by the specific resource type, though it does not explicitly contrast with siblings.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus other list tools (e.g., measurements_list_bmi, measurements_list_height). There is no mention of typical use cases, prerequisites, or any conditions that would make this tool the preferred choice.

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