get_steps_data

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, so 'Garmin Connect, read-only' merely restates structured data. The word 'available' weakly implies empty/missing data for some dates, which is useful but left unexplained; no mention of rate limits or per-day granularity.

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?

Very short, but the date-format rule is stated twice ('cDate' format 'YYYY-MM-DD' and again 'Dates are YYYY-MM-DD'), so the second parenthetical earns no place. The remaining content is front-loaded but underspecified rather than tight.

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 needn't be described. Still, for a 1-param tool in a dense family of per-day metric getters, the definition omits what distinguishes it from get_daily_steps and what aggregate the 'steps data' returns, leaving genuine ambiguity.

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 the description must carry the single parameter — and it does specify the 'YYYY-MM-DD' format for cdate, which the bare string schema does not. However it never explains what 'cDate' means semantically (calendar date vs. timestamp) or whether timezone matters.

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 verb 'fetch' and resource 'steps data' are stated, but the sibling list contains get_daily_steps (and get_floors, get_intensity_minutes_data, etc.), and the description gives no basis for choosing between get_steps_data and get_daily_steps. Purpose is legible but not disambiguated.

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?

There is no statement of when to use this tool or when to prefer a sibling such as get_daily_steps, get_daily_summaries, or get_stats_and_body. The only usage hint is an implied scalar date parameter.

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