Log Measure (Withings)

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

The description adds 'Requires write access,' which is a useful prerequisite and aligns with readOnlyHint=false. However, it does not disclose other behavioral traits such as whether the operation creates a new entry, any return value, or potential side effects. Annotations already cover the safety profile, but the description adds minimal beyond that.

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 two short sentences that are front-loaded with the primary action and example, followed by a critical prerequisite. Every word contributes to the meaning, with no redundancy or filler.

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 write tool with no output schema, the description does not explain what the agent should expect on success (e.g., confirmation, status code) or any side effects. While the schema and annotations cover parameters and safety, the absence of return-value information is a notable gap, making it minimally viable.

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?

All three parameters are fully described in the schema (type, value, date), with clear examples and defaults, so the baseline is 3. The description's example 'weight in kg' duplicates what the schema already states, adding little extra meaning beyond the schema.

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 states a clear, specific verb ('log') and resource ('body measurement'), with a concrete example ('weight in kg'). It distinguishes from the sibling get_* tools by indicating a write operation ('manually log'), making the tool's purpose unambiguous.

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 the tool is for manual logging when the user wants to input a measurement, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., withings_get_measures for reading). No exclusions or alternative tools are mentioned, so usage guidance is only inferred.

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