Fitbit Quickstart

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, and idempotentHint, which are consistent. The description adds value by noting the adaptive behavior based on current state (env vars, token), which goes beyond annotations. No contradictions.

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?

Two concise sentences. The first sentence gives the core purpose and adaptive nature. The second provides a specific call-to-action. No redundant or missing information.

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 the tool's purpose and when to use it. It lacks details about the output (e.g., format of the walkthrough) or what happens if the user is already set up. However, given the simple nature and good annotations, it is mostly complete.

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% for the only parameter (response_format). The description does not mention this parameter, leaving the agent to infer from the schema alone. However, the parameter is simple (enum with markdown/json) and self-explanatory, so a baseline 3 is appropriate.

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's purpose: 'Personalized 3-step setup walkthrough for the human user.' It also provides a specific use case: 'Call this first when the user asks "how do I connect Fitbit?"' This effectively distinguishes it from sibling tools like fitbit_onboarding.

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?

Explicit guidance: 'Call this first when the user asks "how do I connect Fitbit?"' This tells the agent exactly when to use this tool and implies it should be used before other setup or data tools.

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