garmin_respiration

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, yet it never states that this is a read-only operation, whether it needs account auth, or any rate-limit/freshness behavior. The reference-range and interpretation content is domain context, not operational 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?

Front-loads the returned metric in the first sentence, then adds compact clinical context. Three short sentences with little waste, though the interpretive sentence is slightly tangential to invocation.

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?

An output schema exists, so return-format details are covered and the description needn't explain them. For a simple read tool this is nearly adequate, but the lone 'days' parameter is undocumented in both schema and description, leaving the time dimension 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?

There is one parameter (days, default 14) at 0% schema description coverage, and the description never mentions it or explains that it controls the lookback window. The single parameter's meaning must be inferred, so the description fails to compensate for the coverage gap.

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?

States a specific resource and metric: 'Waking respiration rate with min/max range.' An agent knows it returns respiration data with a range. However, it gives no differentiation from the many other Garmin health-metric siblings (garmin_hrv, garmin_stress, garmin_spo2, garmin_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?

There is no when-to-use guidance and no mention of alternatives among siblings. The clinical interpretation ('elevated respiration at rest can indicate illness, stress...') tells the agent how to read the value, not when to call this tool rather than garmin_hrv or garmin_health_summary.

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