get_health_data_catalog

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey behavioral traits. It indicates a read-only listing operation, but does not disclose performance guarantees, result size, or whether the list is exhaustive. It is transparent about what it lists but lacks depth.

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?

One short sentence (11 words) that is front-loaded with the action 'List.' No wasted words, very efficient.

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 simplicity (no parameters, output schema present) and no sibling tool with similar scope, the description is mostly complete. However, 'local record coverage' could benefit from elaboration, but the output schema likely clarifies.

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?

There are 0 parameters, so the description carries the burden. It adds meaning by specifying what is listed ('supported detailed data type and its local record coverage'), which goes beyond the empty schema.

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 clearly states it lists 'every supported detailed data type and its local record coverage,' which is a specific verb ('list') and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like get_health_history (which lists actual records) and get_daily_health_facts.

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 does not directly state when to use this tool vs alternatives, but its purpose ('list all data types and coverage') implies it is for discovering available data types. No explicit exclusion or condition is mentioned.

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