User profile

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds a non-obvious behavioral trait: Garmin returns metric values even if the app displays imperial, which is important for interpreting units across tools. This goes beyond 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?

The description is extremely concise: two sentences that front-load the core purpose and immediately provide a crucial usage tip. No wasted words or redundant information.

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 profile getter with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description is fully complete. It lists the returned fields, warns about metric units, and the schema handles the detail parameter. The tool is simple enough that no additional behavior needs explaining.

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?

The only parameter 'detail' is fully explained in the input schema with a clear description of 'summary' vs 'full' and usage guidance. Since schema description coverage is 100%, the description does not need to add parameter semantics; baseline 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 clearly states the tool's purpose with a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('account profile'), and lists concrete fields (name, birth date, height, weight, gender, activity level, measurement system). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like garmin_get_body_composition by focusing on the user profile and its measurement system.

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 gives explicit usage context: 'Worth checking once before interpreting units in other tools' and explains that Garmin returns metric values regardless of app display. While it doesn't mention alternatives or exclusions, this is a clear when-to-use hint that adds value.

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