Apple Health Weekly Summary

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, openWorld, idempotent, and non-destructive behaviors. The description adds context that the tool uses locally exported data (not live API) and includes a disclaimer about non-medical advice, which goes beyond annotation information.

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 two sentences: the first states the core action, the second adds disclaimers. It is front-loaded, concise, and contains no unnecessary words.

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?

Despite having 5 optional parameters and no output schema, the description does not explain what the summary includes (e.g., metrics), how parameters like privacy_mode or response_format affect output, or prerequisites like requiring an export. The annotations cover safety but leave functional details missing.

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 coverage is low (40%), with only end_date and timezone having descriptions. The tool description does not mention any parameters or their meanings, failing to compensate for the gaps in schema documentation.

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 builds a weekly wellness summary from local Apple Health export data, with disclaimers about not being live HealthKit or medical advice. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like apple_health_daily_summary or apple_health_wellness_context, though the name implies a weekly scope.

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 local export data and weekly periods, and disclaims live HealthKit and medical advice. However, it provides no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, nor mentions alternatives like daily_summary for single-day needs.

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