getDailySummary

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full burden: it does disclose two non-obvious behaviors — the hard 14-day range cap and that range responses use Garmin's v2 field names rather than the single-date shape. It omits whether this is strictly read-only, whether auth/existing Garmin session is required, and how errors surface for over-long ranges.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence: purpose and metrics first, scope and parameters second, format notes parenthetically. No filler and nothing to cut.

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 zero required params, no annotations, and no output schema, the description does the necessary work by listing the returned metrics and flagging the differing range response shape. The residual gap is that 'Garmin's v2 field names' is not actionable without external docs and the mutual exclusivity of 'date' vs. fromDate/toDate is only implied.

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 the baseline is 3, but the description adds real meaning beyond the schema: the pairing requirement is framed as an either/or mode choice and the undocumented 14-day maximum is introduced. It still doesn't say what happens when both 'date' and the from/to pair are supplied.

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?

Names a specific resource ('Daily user summary') and enumerates the returned metrics (steps, calories, stress, body battery, resting HR), which distinguishes it from narrower siblings like getBodyBattery, getDailyHeartRate, and getSleep. The single-date vs. range scope is stated up front.

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?

It explains the two invocation modes ('for one date, or for up to 14 days') and which parameters select each, which is genuine usage context. However, it never says when to prefer this aggregate over the many sibling single-metric tools (getSleep, getBodyBattery, getDashboardData), so the agent still infers the choice.

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