Fetch effective weight goals for an inclusive calendar date range, enabling users to track target weight changes over time.
体重目标。与官方客户端 get_effective_weight_goals 一一对应。参数和日期限制沿用官方接口。Return effective weight goals for an inclusive calendar date range.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| end_date | Yes | ||
| start_date | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that the range is inclusive and that it corresponds to the official client, but it does not explain what 'effective' means, any limits, or the response behavior.
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?
It is short, but it repeats the same purpose in Chinese and English and includes vague meta statements about matching the official client and following the official interface. The core purpose is front-loaded, but several sentences do not earn their place.
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?
For a two-parameter read-only tool with no output schema and zero schema parameter descriptions, the definition is incomplete. It leaves required date semantics and the meaning of 'effective weight goals' unexplained.
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 needs to compensate for the two required date parameters. It only says the range is an inclusive calendar date range and defers date restrictions to the official interface, but it does not specify date format, timezone, ordering, or range limits.
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 resource and action: return effective weight goals for an inclusive calendar date range. It implicitly distinguishes from get_weight_measurements by focusing on goals rather than measurements, but it does not name any sibling tool.
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?
It provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_weight_measurements. Saying that parameters and date restrictions follow the official interface is meta-information, not usage guidance.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.