Daily steps

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds 'Cheap and compact,' which discloses performance and response-size traits beyond the annotations, and the schema's detail parameter further warns about 'full' being potentially enormous. This is valuable behavioral context, though not exhaustive.

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 two sentences: the first front-loads the purpose, the second provides usage guidance. Every word earns its place, with no filler or redundancy.

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?

The tool is simple, read-only, and fully covered by rich schema descriptions and safety annotations. The description states what data is returned (step totals, goal, distance) and when to prefer it, making it complete for an agent to select and invoke correctly without needing an output schema.

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 100%, with each parameter (detail, end_date, start_date) fully explained including formats and behavior. The description's phrase 'in a range' aligns with the start/end date parameters but adds no new semantic detail beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 opens with 'Get daily step totals, step goal and distance for each day in a range,' using a specific verb and resource. It also distinguishes itself from the sibling daily-summary tool by explicitly recommending this tool for step-only questions, making its purpose unmistakable.

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 explicitly says 'prefer this over repeated daily-summary calls when the question is only about step counts over time,' giving clear when-to-use guidance and naming the alternative. This directly helps the agent choose between this tool and garmin_get_daily_summary.

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