apple_health_capabilitiesExplains supported Apple Health export data, unavailable live HealthKit access, privacy modes, and recommended agent workflow before querying health records.
Explain supported Apple Health export data, unavailable live HealthKit access, privacy modes and recommended agent workflow.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| response_format | No | markdown |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.5.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare the tool as read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive, which covers the safety profile. The description adds useful context about the topics covered (e.g., privacy modes, recommended workflow), but does not disclose additional behavioral traits such as rate limits or data freshness. Given the annotation coverage, a score of 3 is appropriate.
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 sentence that efficiently summarizes the tool's purpose, listing key topics. It is concise and front-loaded with the verb "explain." However, it could be slightly better structured (e.g., bullet points) for readability.
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?
The description lists the main topics covered (export data, unavailable live access, privacy modes, agent workflow), which is adequate for an informational tool. However, it does not specify the output format or guarantee completeness, and with no output schema, the agent lacks full context on what to expect.
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 has one parameter (response_format) with enum values and a default, but schema description coverage is 0%. The description does not mention the parameter at all, so it fails to add meaning beyond what the schema provides. This leaves the agent without guidance on how to use the parameter effectively.
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 that the tool explains Apple Health export data, unavailable live HealthKit access, privacy modes, and recommended agent workflow. It uses a specific verb ("explain") and identifies the resource, and among the sibling tools, this is the only one focused on capabilities explanation, providing clear differentiation.
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 does not provide any guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like apple_health_onboarding or apple_health_privacy_audit. It lacks explicit context on prerequisites or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer the appropriate usage scenario.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.