List recovery

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, and the description redundantly restates read-only but adds real value beyond them: the Recovery API subscription requirement and the 404 behavior without it, the chronological ordering guarantee, and the silent omission of empty days. It stops short of pagination or rate-limit detail, so 4 rather than 5.

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?

Front-loads the core behavior and return shape in one dense sentence, then adds short supporting sentences for the alternative and the subscription constraint. The parenthetical balance/StressState enumeration is long but earns its place because there is no output schema to carry it.

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, the description fully specifies the return structure, ordering, missing-day behavior, and the auth/error profile, so nothing an agent needs to call or interpret this tool is missing.

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 100%, so baseline is 3, but the description adds semantics the schema does not: that days are interpreted in the local time the watch stamped on each sample, and that the output is a plain array. This meaningfully clarifies the temporal boundary beyond the raw date pattern.

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 verb (Returns) and resource (recovery-balance samples) with precise scope: local calendar days [from, to] inclusive, chronological ordering, and the exact return shape. It explicitly contrasts with get_recovery for a single day, so an agent can distinguish it from siblings without opening either schema.

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?

Names the alternative explicitly ('Use get_recovery for a single day') and gives the selecting condition (single day vs. range). It also warns days without data are simply absent, so the agent will not misread an empty stretch as an error.

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