Fitbit Daily Activity

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

Annotations already cover safety (readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint) and open world. The description adds that the tool returns daily activity summary, goals, and distances, and that it requires activity scope. No contradictions. The added context justifies a score above 3, though further details on rate limits or auth flows aren't needed given the 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 description is a single sentence that front-loads the action and resource. Every word adds value. No fluff.

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 an output schema exists and 3 optional parameters, the description effectively states what is returned (summary, goals, distances) and the scope requirement. It could mention date defaults or privacy mode options, but those are covered in the input schema. Almost complete for a read-only retrieval tool.

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 description coverage is 67% (date and privacy_mode have descriptions; response_format lacks one). The description does not add extra parameter details beyond the schema. Baseline of 3 is appropriate since the schema does most of the work.

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 verb 'Get' and the resource 'daily activity summary, goals and distances', with scope 'for a date' and prerequisite 'Requires activity scope'. It distinguishes from siblings like fitbit_get_activity (likely intraday) and fitbit_daily_summary.

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 mentions a prerequisite ('Requires activity scope'), providing clear context for when to use this tool. However, it does not explicitly exclude alternatives or name siblings for comparison, such as fitbit_get_activity or fitbit_daily_summary.

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