Stress

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds behavioral detail about what the summary contains and that 'full' returns a per-interval series. No contradictions with annotations.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the core action. Each clause carries specific information: what is returned, the stress categories, and when to request the full series. No filler or redundant wording.

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 simple read-only tool with only 2 parameters, fully described in the schema, and no output schema, the description adequately explains return contents and the optional full-detail mode. It is complete for practical use.

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%: both 'date' and 'detail' have detailed descriptions. The description reinforces 'Use detail='full'' but adds little beyond the schema's own parameter explanations, so a 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 a specific verb and resource: 'Get stress for one day.' It then enumerates the exact output components (average and maximum stress, plus time divided between rest/low/medium/high stress), which clearly distinguishes it from sibling health metric getters like sleep or 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?

Provides clear guidance on when to use the default 'summary' vs 'detail='full'' ('Use detail='full' for the underlying per-interval stress series'). It does not explicitly compare alternatives among siblings, but the scope and data type make the use case obvious.

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