get_water_intake

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

With no annotations provided, the description itself must convey behavioral traits. 'Get' implies a read-only operation and 'for a specific date' sets the query scope, but it does not disclose what happens when no record exists, what units are returned, or any permissions needed. This is a modest but not comprehensive disclosure.

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 a single eight-word sentence with no filler or redundancy. It front-loads the verb and resource, earning the maximum score for conciseness.

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 tool is a simple single-parameter getter with no output schema and no annotations. The description identifies the input and resource, but leaves out return format (e.g., units, null vs zero behavior) and any date-handling caveats. For such a simple tool this is a minor gap, so completeness is adequate but not outstanding.

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 'date' is fully documented in the schema with format 'YYYY-MM-DD', so the description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 applies due to 100% schema coverage.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get'), names the resource ('water intake'), and scopes it to a specific date. This makes the operation clear and distinguishes it from sibling mutation tools like set_water_intake and add_water.

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 the tool is for retrieving a water intake value for a single date, which is enough to signal the common use case, but it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it (e.g., versus get_diet_daily_summary). Therefore usage guidance is only implied.

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