Apple Health Quickstart

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

The description adds significant value beyond annotations by detailing adaptive behavior based on the current state (e.g., APPLE_HEALTH_EXPORT_PATH existence/parse validity) and emphasizing the local-first, server-free nature. This complements the annotations (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint) 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?

The description is extremely concise—two sentences that front-load the core purpose and immediately follow with critical usage guidance and behavioral traits. Every sentence is essential and well structured.

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 low complexity (single optional param, no output schema, clear purpose), the description covers all necessary context: purpose, usage scenario, state adaptation, and privacy guarantee. It is fully complete for an agent to understand when and why to invoke this tool.

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?

With only one simple parameter (response_format) that has a clear enum and default, the schema already defines it adequately. While the description does not mention the parameter, the lack of need is justified by the parameter's simplicity and self-explanatory nature. No additional explanation is necessary.

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's purpose ('Personalized 3-step setup walkthrough for the human user') and identifies the resource ('Apple Health connection'). It also distinguishes from siblings by specifying to call it first when the user asks about connecting Apple Health.

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?

Explicitly instructs to call this tool first when the user asks 'how do I connect Apple Health?', providing clear context. However, it does not mention when not to use it or suggest alternative tools, which could be helpful given the presence of sibling tools like apple_health_connection_status and apple_health_onboarding.

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