Get Eight Sleep Temperature

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructive behavior, so the description does not need to re-state safety. It adds that the tool returns current state and enumerates the data groups, but does not disclose details like privacy_mode defaults or response format. This is adequate but not rich behavioral context.

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 focused sentence with no filler. It front-loads the action and immediately states what data is returned, making it easy to scan.

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 a read-Only getter with no required parameters and an output schema present, the description covers the only essential call-decision information. Optional parameters and return structure are already provided through the schema and annotations, so nothing critical is missing for invoking it correctly.

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 description adds no parameter-specific meaning, but the schema already documents user_id and privacy_mode with descriptions; only response_format lacks one. With 67% schema coverage and all parameters optional, the description does not need to compensate much, but it contributes nothing either.

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 uses a clear verb ('Return') and names three concrete data elements: current heating level, smart-schedule levels, and side on/off state. This distinguishes it from other temperature-related tools like set_temperature or temperature_trend, though it does not explicitly name any sibling.

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 word 'current' implies this is for reading the present heating/side state, and siblings like set_temperature and set_side make the contrast inferable. However, there is no explicit when-to-use or when-to-use-instead guidance, so the agent must infer usage from context.

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