get_steps

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered, but the description adds no context beyond that. It does not say whether results are one row per day or an aggregate, how gaps/incomplete days appear, or whether step goals are returned for days with no data.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler or redundancy. It is efficient, though the brevity reflects under-specification rather than disciplined editing.

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 two-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description at least indicates what is returned (daily totals plus goals). It still leaves the date format, default end_date behavior, and per-day vs aggregate shape unstated, which an agent needs in order to call it correctly.

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 all parameter meaning must come from the description, and it provides almost none. It implies start_date and end_date bound a range, but never states the accepted date format or what a null end_date means (today? start_date? unbounded?).

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 uses a specific verb and resource: it returns daily step totals and step goals over a date range. That is clearer than a restated name, but it offers no differentiation from siblings such as get_daily_summary or get_daily_symptoms-style tools that also expose per-day metrics.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no mention of alternatives such as get_daily_summary or search_activities, and no exclusions. An agent must infer from the name alone when this tool is the right pick.

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