icu_get_hr_curves

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the description's addition that it analyzes HR data to find peak outputs provides useful behavioral context. It does not contradict annotations and adds specific analytical behavior.

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 three short paragraphs with a clear front-loaded purpose sentence. However, there is slight redundancy between the first sentence and the second paragraph, making it marginally less concise than optimal.

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 tool has an output schema (not shown but indicated) and 100% schema coverage for parameters, the description adequately explains the tool's purpose and output (best efforts for durations). It is complete for a read-only analytical 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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage, so the tool description does not need to add parameter details. It mentions 'different time durations' which loosely relates to days_back/time_period but adds no new semantic meaning beyond the schema.

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 retrieves heart rate curve data showing best efforts for various durations, specifying the verb 'Get' and resource 'HR curve data'. It differentiates from siblings like icu_get_hr_histogram and icu_get_best_efforts by focusing on HR curves across effort durations.

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 provides context for use, mentioning it's useful for tracking cardiovascular fitness and identifying HR zones, but does not explicitly state when not to use or name alternatives. It implies the appropriate scenario without exclusions.

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