Apple Health Privacy Audit

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds the important behavioral constraint 'without revealing health data', which is not captured in annotations, enhancing transparency about privacy preservation.

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?

Single sentence that is front-loaded with the core purpose. No wasted words, every phrase earns its place.

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 simple parameter set, rich annotations, and no output schema, the description sufficiently covers the tool's purpose and safety. Lacks detail on return format but that is partially addressed by the response_format parameter.

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 has 0% description coverage, so description should compensate. However, the sole parameter (response_format) with enum and default is self-explanatory. Description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, justifying a baseline score of 3.

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 tool returns 'the local privacy and export-file posture', a specific verb-resource pair. It distinguishes from siblings by emphasizing 'without revealing health data', contrasting with tools like apple_health_data_inventory that might expose data.

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 usage for privacy audits without exposing data but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this versus sibling tools like apple_health_export_freshness or apple_health_data_inventory. No when-not-to-use or alternative recommendations.

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