Update Shared Wellness Profile

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

Annotations are all false, so description carries full burden. Discloses critical behaviors: requires user confirmation, rejects secret-like fields. Does not detail error handling or success response, but adds value beyond 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?

Three concise sentences, each adding unique value. No redundancy. Front-loaded with purpose, then usage condition, then security behavior.

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?

Covers core purpose and constraints well, but lacks information about return values or error conditions. As a mutation tool with no output schema, some completeness on expected outcome is missing.

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 already covers parameters well (67% coverage individually, but all three have descriptions). Description adds context: clarifies the conditional need for explicit_user_intent and the secret rejection relevant to the patch object. Adds meaning beyond schema.

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?

Clear verb 'persist' and resource 'partial patch to the canonical Delx Wellness profile'. Distinguishes from sibling read tools like polar_profile_get. Includes behavioral specifics like rejection of secret fields.

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?

Explicitly states requirement for explicit_user_intent after user confirmation, which is a key usage condition. Does not explicitly name alternatives, but among siblings it is the only update tool.

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