create-body-measurement

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

With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility. It discloses that all measurement fields are optional and that the tool returns 409 on duplicate dates, advising to use update instead. However, it does not describe success response or authentication requirements, which are minor gaps.

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 extremely concise, consisting of two sentences that convey all necessary information: purpose, optionality, and conflict handling with sibling tool reference. No unnecessary words or details.

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 high schema coverage and absence of output schema, the description adequately covers the essential behavior. It explains the duplicate detection and alternative tool, which is critical for correct usage. The lack of success return info is a minor omission but does not prevent effective use.

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 input schema already provides 100% description coverage for all 18 parameters, and the required field is clear. The description adds minimal value by stating 'All measurement fields are optional', which is already implied by the schema's use of 'anyOf' with null. Baseline score of 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 clearly states the action ('Create a body measurement entry'), the resource ('body measurement entry'), and the key constraint ('for a given date'). It explicitly mentions that all measurement fields are optional and distinguishes the tool from its sibling 'update-body-measurement' by describing the duplicate conflict behavior.

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 provides explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus the sibling 'update-body-measurement' by mentioning the 409 conflict and suggesting the alternative. It does not cover other usage contexts, but the guidance is sufficient for normal use.

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