Get Garmin weight goals

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so safety is covered; the description adds the reporting scope (goals in effect for a window) and the 366-day cap, and because there is no output schema it also sketches the returned fields and the kg unit. Some of the default-range text duplicates the parameter descriptions, which keeps it from a 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?

Two short sentences with zero filler: what it returns, the sibling to avoid confusing it with, and the range limits — all front-loaded.

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?

For a two-optional-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, unit, default window, and the span cap, which is nearly everything needed to call it. It could say what happens when no goal is in effect in the window, a minor gap.

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% and both date parameters already document their formats and defaults, so the baseline is 3. The description adds only the kg unit for the returned target weight, not any new semantics about start_date/end_date.

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+resource ('weight goals in effect during a date range') and names the payload fields returned (target weight in kg, start/end date). It also explicitly distinguishes itself from garmin_get_weight, so an agent can tell goals apart from weigh-ins 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 sibling to use for a different need ('For weigh-ins use garmin_get_weight') and gives the default window plus the per-call span cap, which is exactly the context needed to choose this tool and size the query correctly.

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