Garmin Daily Stress

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

The annotation already declares readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, and openWorldHint=true, indicating a safe read operation. The description adds a disclaimer 'Not medical advice' but no additional behavioral context 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?

Two sentences with no wasted words. The first sentence is front-loaded with the core purpose. The second sentence is a necessary disclaimer. Highly concise.

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 is simple (3 optional parameters, output schema present, annotations complete), the description covers the essential purpose. It lacks guidance on typical usage patterns but is adequate for a basic read 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 has default but no description). The description does not elaborate on parameters, failing to compensate for the uncovered parameter. Baseline for <80% coverage requires description to add value, which it does 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 clearly states 'Get Garmin stress summary and samples for a date', which is a specific verb+resource combination that distinguishes it from sibling day-specific tools like garmin_get_sleep_day or garmin_get_heart_day.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it specify any prerequisites or exclusions. It simply states what it does without context.

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