get_daily_summaries

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, so safety is covered. The description adds the source system (Garmin Connect) and the date input format, which is useful but largely restates the read-only annotation and does not describe batching limits, failure behavior, or data completeness.

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 the core capability front-loaded and no filler. The parenthetical efficiently carries source, safety, and format context.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained. However, for a range-query tool with zero schema parameter documentation, the description should clarify range inclusivity and what 'full daily summaries' aggregates, which it does not.

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 0%, so both 'start' and 'end' are undocumented in the schema. The description supplies only the date format (YYYY-MM-DD) and does not clarify whether the range is inclusive, timezone handling, or ordering constraints, leaving meaningful semantic gaps.

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 clear verb and resource ('Return full daily summaries') and implies aggregation across a date range in one call, setting it apart from the many sibling tools that return individual metrics like steps or heart rate. It does not explicitly name an alternative, but the 'full ... in one call' phrasing conveys the aggregate nature.

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?

Usage is only implied through 'in one call' and 'for a date range', suggesting it is the preferred bulk alternative to per-metric siblings. There is no explicit statement of when to use this versus get_user_summary or the individual daily metrics tools, and no exclusions are given.

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