Wellness Onboarding Flow

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

"Read-only" merely restates readOnlyHint=true, earning no credit. The description does add useful context beyond annotations by disclosing what is returned (questionnaire, shared profile, missing critical fields, cross-connector hint), but it says nothing about caching, rate limits, or how the hint is derived.

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-loaded with the read-only constraint and the return payload before the usage trigger. The long field enumeration in the second sentence is dense but functional; nothing is wasted.

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?

With no output schema, the description carries the burden of describing returns and does so by enumerating the payload. Both parameters are optional and the safety profile is covered by annotations, so only the response_format semantics remain unexplained.

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 50%: locale is documented, response_format is not. The description mentions the locale options ("en or pt-BR") but adds nothing about response_format or the markdown/json output difference, so it only marginally compensates for the schema gap.

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?

States a specific verb (Return) plus the exact resource (the 11-question Delx Wellness onboarding flow) and enumerates the payload contents: shared profile, missing critical fields, cross-connector hint. This is clearly distinguishable from siblings like polar_profile_get or polar_wellness_context.

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?

"Use this when the user starts a fresh wellness session" gives a concrete triggering condition and lists the fields it is meant to populate (preferred_name, goals, devices, safety, etc.). It does not name an alternative or state when not to use it, so it falls short of a 5.

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