fitness_age

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full behavioral burden. It says nothing about read-only behavior, return format, date semantics, or any other trait an agent would need before invoking it.

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 sentence fragment rather than a structured, front-loaded explanation. It is short, but the brevity reflects under-specification rather than efficient communication.

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 annotations, no output schema, and an undocumented parameter, the description is far too sparse. It does not explain what the tool returns, how `date` affects results, or how fitness age is derived from the other available metrics.

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 sole parameter `date` has 0% schema description coverage and is not mentioned in the description at all. The agent cannot tell whether it selects a specific day's fitness age, an aggregation period, or is simply optional with a default.

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 is a German noun phrase ('Fitness age and influencing factors') that largely restates the tool name. It does not state what the tool does, such as computes, retrieves, or explains fitness age, and does not distinguish it from sibling metric tools.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool, when not to use it, or how it relates to alternatives like profile or daily_summaries. The optional date parameter is not mentioned, leaving selection entirely to inference.

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