garmin_get_training_status

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, so no destructive behavior. Description adds value by listing all returned data fields (readiness, status, load, VO2max, HRV, predictions). Could mention that this is a snapshot at current time, but otherwise transparent.

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: first lists data points, second gives usage guidance. Every word serves a purpose, no redundancy.

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 parameters, readOnlyHint annotation, and output schema present, the description fully covers what the tool returns and when to use it. No gaps.

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?

No parameters defined, so description does not need to add parameter semantics. Baseline 4 for zero parameters.

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?

Description explicitly states verb 'get' and resource 'training status' and lists the specific data elements (readiness score, status, acute load, VO2max, HRV, race predictions). It distinguishes from siblings by focusing on training status snapshot, unlike daily summary or activity detail.

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?

Clearly states when to use: 'how is my training going / how recovered am I' questions. Also suggests combining with oura_* for cross-source checks. Lacks explicit when-not-to-use or comparison with other Garmin sibling tools, but usage context is clear.

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