Polar Temperature Measurements

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

Annotations (readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint) already cover safety and idempotency. Description adds the permission requirement but does not contradict annotations. Provides minimal additional behavioral context beyond structured fields.

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 front-load purpose and permission. No redundant or irrelevant information. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

Output schema exists, so return format details are not needed. Description is adequate for a list tool with rich schema and annotations. Lacks guidance on pagination or when to paginate, but schema covers parameters. Minor gap in usage guidance, but overall complete for the tool's complexity.

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 88%, so parameters are well-documented in the schema. Description does not add meaning beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate as schema does the heavy lifting.

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?

Description clearly states verb (List), resource (temperature measurements), and scope (in a date range). Does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools, but the resource name is specific enough to avoid ambiguity.

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?

Only mentions required permission (temperature_measurement:read). No guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives, such as other list tools (e.g., polar_list_activity). No exclusions or when-not-to-use conditions.

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