Get Google Health Settings

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

Annotations already cover the read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive nature, lowering the bar. The description adds valuable context about requiring the 'settings scope' and that it targets the 'authenticated user,' providing permission and user-scoping details beyond 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, focused sentence with no redundancy. Every word contributes: the action, the resource, example fields, and the required scope. It is front-loaded and easily parsed.

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 strong annotations, the description does not need to explain return values or safety traits. It covers the essential purpose and permission requirement. However, it omits mention of the privacy_mode parameter's 'raw' escalation path, which is an edge case an agent might need to know, but this is partially compensated by the schema descriptions.

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?

The description does not mention any of the three parameters (privacy_mode, response_format, explicit_user_intent), even though schema description coverage is only 67%, leaving response_format without a description. The phrase 'such as units and timezone' pertains to the return data, not to input parameters.

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 resource ('authenticated user settings') with concrete examples ('units and timezone'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like google_health_get_profile, which serves a different purpose.

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 the tool is used to fetch user settings but does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives. It mentions the required 'settings scope' as a prerequisite, which gives some guidance, but lacks explicit exclusion or alternative references.

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