Eight Sleep Wellness Context

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

Annotations already provide the read-only/idempotent safety profile; the description adds the key behavioral trait that this tool transforms and normalizes trends rather than returning raw data. It discloses that it is a build/compute operation over trends and that its output is intended for downstream tools. No contradiction with 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?

A single sentence that front-loads the verb, output, and source, then gives the consumer rationale. No filler or repetition of schema details. 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?

The output schema and rich annotations cover return-value and safety context, and the description explains the tool's role in the ecosystem. However, for a tool with six optional parameters and sparse schema documentation, the description doesn't fully specify how inputs like soreness or injury_flags shape the payload. It is adequate for selection but not fully complete for invocation details.

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?

Only days and timezone have schema descriptions (2 of 6 parameters, ~33% coverage), and the description doesn't explain notes, soreness, injury_flags, or response_format semantics. Soreness and injury_flags are suggestive by name but their effect on the normalized payload is unclear. Since schema coverage is low, the description needed to compensate and did not.

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 states a specific verb ('Build'), an explicit output resource ('delx-wellness-context/v1 payload'), and a source ('recent Eight Sleep trends'). It also names downstream consumers, which differentiates it from sibling Eight Sleep data-access tools like eight_sleep_get_trends. Clear and distinct.

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 positions the tool as an integration/normalization layer for other Delx tools, implying it should be selected when sleep context is needed in the normalized format rather than raw Eight Sleep API output. It doesn't explicitly exclude direct alternatives or list exhaustive conditions, but the consumer rationale gives clear context for when to use it.

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