get_daily_summary
Retrieve daily activity summaries for a specific date or a date range from Mi Fitness cloud data.
Instructions
Get daily activity summary
Input Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| date | No | ||
| end_date | No | ||
| start_date | No |
Retrieve daily activity summaries for a specific date or a date range from Mi Fitness cloud data.
Get daily activity summary
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| date | No | ||
| end_date | No | ||
| start_date | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.2.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description must fully disclose behavior. It only says 'get,' implying a read operation, but does not specify what the summary contains, whether it supports a single date or a range, or any response details. This is insufficient for a tool with no other behavioral metadata.
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?
The description is a single short sentence, but it is under-specified rather than concise. It does not earn its place as it fails to provide meaningful information beyond the tool's name.
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 lack of annotations, output schema, and parameter descriptions, this description is critically incomplete. The agent cannot infer what data is returned, how to use the date range, or what the response looks like, making this tool essentially unusable without external knowledge.
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 0%, and the description does not clarify any of the three parameters (date, end_date, start_date). There is no indication of their format, validation, or how they interact (e.g., mutually exclusive or range-based), leaving the agent with no guidance.
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 provides a clear verb and resource ('Get daily activity summary'), but the 'daily' wording conflicts with start_date/end_date parameters that suggest a range. It also does not distinguish this tool from sibling query tools (e.g., query_metric_series) that may also return summaries.
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 guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives, nor any mention of appropriate scenarios, date ranges, or prerequisites. The description neither explains its context nor excludes any use cases.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.