Eight Sleep MCP Capabilities

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond those hints: it makes no external API call and exposes no secrets, which is meaningful for an agent deciding whether this tool is safe to invoke.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence covers the tool's purpose and its key safety caveats without wasted words. Every clause 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?

For an informational capabilities tool with one optional parameter, strong annotations, and an output schema, the description is complete. It communicates what the tool covers and the absence of side effects; return format details are already supplied by the output schema.

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 only parameter, response_format, is fully specified by the schema through its enum values ('markdown'/'json') and default. The description does not mention the parameter, so it adds no parameter-level guidance, but the schema already carries the semantic load for this optional, self-describing parameter.

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?

States a specific verb ('Explain') with concrete subjects: supported Eight Sleep data, mutation gate, privacy modes, and project links. It also distinguishes itself by explicitly saying it does not call Eight Sleep or expose secrets, separating it from the many data/action siblings.

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 frames this as a meta/capabilities tool, so an agent can infer it is for orientation and explanation rather than live operations. It does not explicitly name alternative sibling tools or define when not to use it, so it misses the full explicit routing.

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