get_daily_activity_statistics

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

No annotations are provided, so the description fully bears the burden. It states the tool is read-only, describes the response structure, and discloses behavioral traits like maximum interval and null value meaning. No contradictions.

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?

Three sentences clearly convey purpose, response format, usage guidance, and read-only nature. No redundancy, but could potentially be slightly more concise by merging response format details. Still efficient.

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 moderate complexity (2 params, no output schema, no annotations), the description covers all necessary context: what the tool does, what it returns, constraints, and differentiation from siblings. It is complete for a 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 description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description does not add parameter-specific information beyond what is already in the schema (ISO-8601, UTC, 28-day constraint). The response structure description is helpful but not directly about parameters.

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 returns aggregated daily step count and energy consumption from the /247 API for a datetime range. It specifies the verb ('Returns') and resource, and distinguishes from sibling list_daily_activity by noting preference when totals are needed vs intraday time-series.

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 explicitly advises when to prefer this tool over list_daily_activity (for totals) and notes the maximum fetch interval of 28 days. It also explains that null Value indicates no synced data, providing clear usage context.

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