Retrieve daily all-day stress levels and stress duration buckets from Garmin Connect. Use the lookback period to monitor recovery and inform fitness advice.
Daily all-day stress levels and stress duration buckets.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| days | No | Lookback window in days. |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.2.0Input schema / properties / days / descriptionAdded value: +"Lookback window in days."Input schema / properties / days / maximumAdded value: +30Input schema / properties / days / minimumAdded value: +1v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, yet it only names the data returned. It doesn't state that this is a read-only operation, how the duration buckets are derived, or any granularity/aggregation behavior. The output schema covers return shape, but the operation's behavior is left unexplained.
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 with no filler that immediately states the resource and the data provided. Appropriately sized for a simple single-parameter getter.
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?
The output schema means return values needn't be explained, and schema coverage is complete for the lone parameter. What's missing is any usage context or relation to the many sibling health metrics, leaving a small but real gap for an agent choosing among 14 similar tools.
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?
Only one optional parameter (days) exists and the schema documents it fully at 100% coverage, so the schema does the heavy lifting. The description adds nothing about the lookback parameter, so baseline 3 applies.
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 resource (stress) and the metric shape (daily all-day stress levels and duration buckets), which is clear enough to distinguish from most siblings. However it doesn't explicitly differentiate itself from related recovery/fitness tools like get_recovery or get_fitness, so it falls short of a 5.
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 gives no when-to-use guidance, no mention of the lookback window, and no routing to or away from sibling tools such as get_recovery or get_fitness. The agent must infer usage entirely from the name.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.