Fetch daily Garmin health summaries for a date range, including steps, calories, resting heart rate, stress, Body Battery, intensity minutes, and floors. Defaults to the last 7 days.
Tageszusammenfassungen pro Tag: Schritte, Kalorien, Ruhepuls, Stress, Body Battery, Intensitätsminuten, Etagen usw. Standard: letzte 7 Tage.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| end_date | No | ||
| start_date | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.4.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden; it does disclose the default time window (last 7 days) and that data is aggregated per day, which is useful behavioral context. It does not state date format expectations, whether data is returned newest-first, or any rate/auth constraints.
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 compact sentences: metrics first, then the default window. Front-loaded and free of padding, though it could be slightly tighter given the list of metrics is long.
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 output schema, no annotations, and 0% schema description coverage, the description should ideally document the date format and return shape; it covers the metric list and default range but leaves those two gaps. Adequate but not complete for a data-retrieval tool.
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?
Schema coverage is 0% and the two date parameters are plain nullable strings with no format documented. The description partially compensates by stating the default range is the last 7 days, but it never specifies the expected date string format (e.g. ISO YYYY-MM-DD) or the start/end interaction, leaving a real gap.
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?
States a specific resource (daily summaries per day) and enumerates the metrics returned (steps, calories, resting heart rate, stress, Body Battery, intensity minutes, floors), which makes the tool's output recognizable. It doesn't explicitly differentiate itself from siblings like steps, stress or body_battery, which return overlapping single-metric views.
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?
'Standard: letzte 7 Tage' gives the default behavior, which implies a sensible no-argument usage, but there is no guidance on when to prefer this aggregate over the single-metric siblings such as steps or body_battery, nor any exclusions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.