Update Shared Wellness Profile

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

The description adds important behavioral details beyond annotations: the requirement for explicit user intent, rejection of secret-like fields, and that Strava's GPS-redaction default is unaffected. These are not present in the annotations and help the agent understand side effects.

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 three concise sentences, each providing essential information: the action, a key requirement, and behavioral constraints. No wasted words, and the most critical info appears early.

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?

The description covers main behaviors but lacks information on return values, error conditions, or prerequisites like authentication. Given no output schema, mentioning what the tool returns on success would improve completeness. It adequately covers the core functionality.

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 adds minimal meaning beyond the input schema. The schema already describes the patch object, response_format, and explicit_user_intent with sufficient detail. The tool description echoes the intent requirement but does not elaborate on patch structure or subkeys beyond what the schema provides.

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 tool persists a partial patch to the Delx Wellness profile, specifying the action and resource. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like strava_profile_get (read) or other update tools, which would improve clarity.

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 provides a key usage condition (requires explicit_user_intent=true after user confirmation) but lacks guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as reading with strava_profile_get. No explicit exclusion or contrast with siblings is given.

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