CGM profile get

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds the file path and the reason for the read (picking time-in-range profile), which is useful context but not substantial behavioral disclosure beyond annotations. No contradiction.

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: the first states the action and file, the second explains purpose and read-only nature. Front-loaded with the core functionality, no wasted words. Extremely efficient.

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?

For a simple read-only tool with no output schema, the description explains what it returns, where from, and why it's used. The parameter is covered by schema. It doesn't describe return format or error handling, but for this tool that's not critical. It's complete enough for an agent to decide when to call it.

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 single parameter privacy_mode is fully documented in the schema (enum summary/structured/raw with description). The tool description does not mention the parameter or its effect, but since schema coverage is 100%, the baseline is 3. No additional value is added, but none is required.

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 states the specific verb 'Returns' and resource 'shared Delx Wellness profile', names the exact file path, and explains its purpose in choosing time-in-range profiles. It distinguishes itself from sibling cgm_profile_update by focusing on read-only retrieval. This is a precise, self-contained purpose.

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 implies usage: get the profile to surface diabetes status for selecting time-in-range settings. It doesn't explicitly say when NOT to use it or mention alternatives, but the read-only nature and purpose give clear context. Given sibling cgm_profile_update, the intent is obvious, though explicit exclusion would push it to 5.

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