hr_intraday

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

With no annotations, the description partially discloses that data is thinned to 24-hour averages to avoid context overflow, but it omits behavioral traits like read-only nature, authentication needs, rate limits, or response format. The description is insufficient for a tool with no annotations.

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 short sentence, which is concise but lacks structure. While it efficiently conveys the core idea, it could be improved by front-loading the purpose and adding brief parameter guidance.

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?

Despite having an output schema, the description leaves out crucial context about the input parameter and the tool's scope among many health siblings. The tool is simple, but the description is incomplete for a user to confidently use it without external knowledge.

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 one parameter 'date' with 0% description coverage, and the tool description does not mention the parameter at all. It fails to add any meaning beyond the schema, such as date format, required/optional, or default behavior.

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 provides intraday heart rate data, sampled to 24 hourly averages, which distinguishes it from siblings like resting_hr or hrv. The verb is implied (retrieve/sample) and the resource is specific (heart rate intraday).

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 does not provide any guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as resting_hr, hrv, or stress. There is no mention of prerequisites, limitations, or when not to use it.

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