get_health_records

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses encryption at rest, full-fidelity data, date inclusivity, pagination behavior, and specifics about sleep records and heart rate samples. This provides valuable behavioral context beyond the schema.

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 concise with three sentences. The main purpose is front-loaded, and every sentence adds value without redundancy. No unnecessary words.

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?

With an output schema present, the description does not need to detail return values. It covers usage order (catalog first), data type selection, pagination, and special data fidelity aspects. Slightly more detail on data_types format would improve completeness.

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%, so the description must compensate. It adds semantics for dates ('inclusive YYYY-MM-DD values') and mentions pagination parameters. However, it does not explain the format or possible values for the 'data_types' parameter, leaving some ambiguity.

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 the action ('Return') and the resource ('encrypted-at-rest, full-fidelity Google Health records'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_daily_health_facts by emphasizing 'full-fidelity' and mentioning specific data types like sleep and heart rate.

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 provides explicit guidance: 'Use the catalog first, request only the data types needed, and paginate with limit/offset.' It also notes inclusive date formats. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or name alternative tools for different purposes.

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