Garmin Intensity Minutes

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

Annotations already indicate read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior. The description adds no behavioral context beyond annotations, such as data freshness, error handling, or privacy implications. For a tool with complete annotations, description should still add value but does not.

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 clear sentence with no wasted words. It is front-loaded and appropriately sized for a simple tool, though it could include more context without verbosity.

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 tool has 3 parameters and an output schema, the description is too minimal. It does not explain what intensity minutes represent, time zone assumptions, or how to interpret results. More context would be beneficial for effective use.

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 provides descriptions for 2 of 3 parameters (date, privacy_mode) but response_format lacks description. The tool description itself does not explain parameters further. With 67% schema coverage, the description adds no extra meaning, making it adequate but not excellent.

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 action ('get') and the resource ('Garmin intensity minutes for a date'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like garmin_get_daily_summary by focusing on a specific metric, but does not explicitly contrast them.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool vs. alternatives (e.g., garmin_get_daily_summary which may include intensity minutes). No when-not or prerequisites mentioned. The description is too brief to support decision-making.

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