Get Shared Wellness Profile

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

The description adds value beyond the annotations by disclosing that the profile stores only user-typed onboarding data and never OAuth tokens, keys, or biomarkers. This is consistent with the readOnlyHint and idempotentHint annotations. No contradictions.

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 two sentences long, front-loaded with purpose and followed by behavioral context. Every sentence earns its place without redundancy or fluff.

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 annotations and simplicity of the tool, the description provides sufficient context about what the profile contains and the read-only nature. However, it lacks details on the return format or error handling, and the parameter omission reduces completeness.

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 the single parameter 'response_format' at all, and the input schema has 0% coverage. Although the parameter is simple with an enum, the agent receives no guidance on its purpose or default behavior, which is a significant 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?

The description explicitly states the tool reads the 'canonical Delx Wellness profile' shared with other connectors, using the verb 'Read' and specifying the resource. It distinguishes from siblings like polar_profile_update and other read tools.

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 clearly states it is 'Read-only' and identifies the profile as shared with other wellness connectors, implying when to use it for general profile reading. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or provide alternatives among the many sibling tools.

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