Fitbit Agent Manifest

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds valuable context by explicitly stating the tool does not call Fitbit or expose secrets, reinforcing safety and no side effects beyond what annotations provide.

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, front-loaded with purpose and key constraint. No unnecessary information; every word 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?

Given the presence of an output schema and simple enum parameters, the description is adequate but minimal. It misses guidance on parameter selection and output contents, though the output schema may partially compensate. Still, for a manifest tool, more completeness is expected.

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 0% (no parameter descriptions in schema). The description does not explain the meaning or usage of the two parameters (client and response_format). It relies solely on enum values, which are insufficient for an AI agent to understand parameter purpose.

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 provides machine-readable guidance for AI agents, using a specific verb-resource pair. It explicitly distinguishes from siblings by noting it does not call Fitbit or expose secrets, setting it apart from data-fetching tools.

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 setup or configuration, and the 'does not call Fitbit' caveat suggests when not to use, but there is no explicit guidance on when to prefer this tool over siblings or alternatives. It lacks a clear 'when to use' statement.

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