get_summary

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It states the tool retrieves a 'combined health summary' but doesn't explain what metrics are included, how averages are calculated, whether data is real-time or historical, or what format the output takes. This leaves significant gaps for an AI agent to understand the tool's behavior.

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, efficient sentence that communicates the core purpose without unnecessary words. It's appropriately sized for a tool with one optional parameter and gets straight to the point with zero wasted text.

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?

Given the complexity of health data aggregation and the absence of both annotations and an output schema, the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain what 'combined health summary' means, what metrics are averaged, or what the return format looks like. For a tool that presumably aggregates multiple health metrics, this leaves too many unanswered questions.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage with clear documentation of the 'days' parameter. The description adds no additional parameter information beyond what's in the schema. According to scoring rules, when schema_description_coverage is high (>80%), the baseline is 3 even with no param info in the description.

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's purpose with a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('combined health summary'), and specifies it includes 'averages across all metrics'. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like get_activities or get_body_battery, which might provide more granular data.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention when this aggregated summary is preferable over individual metric tools (like get_heart_rate or get_sleep_data) or when other tools like generate_chart might be more appropriate for visualization needs.

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