Eight Sleep Temperature Trend

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

The description discloses specific conditional behavior: the correlation note appears only when 3+ paired nights support |r| >= 0.5, and statistics are reported only when the trends payload exposes them. It also states there are no extra API calls, adding value beyond the readOnly and idempotent annotations.

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 single sentence is information-dense but front-loads the purpose with 'Workflow tool: returns...' and packs conditions into parentheticals. It contains no filler, though splitting it into shorter sentences would improve readability.

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?

The description covers output components, data sources, statistical thresholds, and conditional availability of results, which is strong for a read-only summary tool without an output schema. It does not spell out edge cases like insufficient paired nights or default timezone behavior, but the conditional phrasing implies those cases.

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 schema already covers days and timezone with descriptions, and response_format has enum/default values. The description adds some output-level context but does not clarify response_format semantics or the timezone grouping behavior in more detail. With 67% schema coverage, the schema carries the burden adequately, but the description could compensate more.

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 specific verb ('returns') and enumerates concrete resources: the smart-temperature schedule, per-night sleep scores, summary statistics, and a conditional correlation note. It also identifies itself as a workflow reusing get_temperature and get_trends data, which clearly separates it from sibling tools that fetch raw temperature or trend 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 states that it is a workflow tool and that it reuses get_temperature and get_trends data with no extra API calls, implying it is the right choice for consolidated analysis. However, it does not explicitly say when to choose this tool over those raw-data siblings or provide exclusion criteria.

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