fitness_profile

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

Annotations (readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false) indicate a safe read operation. Description adds context that values come from .env and are defaults for zone tools, reinforcing behavior without contradiction.

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?

Description is 4 lines, front-loaded with purpose, then usage context, then parameter and return info. Efficient but slightly verbose. No wasted sentences.

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 the tool's simplicity and presence of output schema, description sufficiently covers input, behavior (reads from .env, returns profile or warning), and relationship with sibling tools. No obvious gaps.

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?

Only one parameter 'response_format' with enum. Schema already describes it as 'markdown o json' with default 'markdown'. Description repeats this without additional semantics beyond what schema provides. Schema coverage is 0% per context, but the schema description is functional.

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?

Description clearly states 'Muestra el perfil configurado' (shows configured profile) listing specific fields (FCmax, FC reposo, edad, ritmo umbral). This is a specific verb and resource, and it distinguishes from sibling Garmin and fitness tools by focusing on local environment variables.

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?

Explains that these values are defaults used by zone tools when not explicitly provided, implying when to check/use this tool. It does not explicitly state when not to use it, but the context is clear enough.

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