Get wellness and recovery data

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful behavioral context beyond annotations: it defaults to the last 14 days, includes period averages, and specifies the Intervals.icu 1–4 scales for subjective ratings. No contradictions with annotations.

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 tight sentences with no filler. The first sentence front-loads the data contents, the second states the default range and intended use case. Every clause earns its place.

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 rich annotations, fully documented parameters, and presence of an output schema, the description is complete for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly. It covers what data is returned, the default date window, and the intended use case, leaving no critical 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%, so the schema already documents the two parameters (newest and oldest) with their defaults. The description's mention of 'Defaults to the last 14 days' reinforces the schema but does not add new semantic meaning beyond what the parameter descriptions already provide. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('daily wellness data') and enumerates the exact fields returned, including resting HR, HRV, sleep, weight, steps, readiness, and subjective ratings. It clearly distinguishes itself from siblings like update_wellness and get_fitness_summary by naming the wellness/recovery domain and its data scope.

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 states 'Use it for recovery and readiness questions,' giving clear context for when to select this tool. It does not name alternative tools or exclusion conditions, but the guidance is sufficiently clear for an agent to route wellness/recovery queries here.

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