get_current_glucose

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

Annotations cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true), so the bar is lower. The description adds genuine context beyond them: that the value can be stale when the sensor or phone is out of range, and that age_minutes is the field to check. It omits auth requirements or rate-limit behavior, but the staleness disclosure is real added value.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose followed by the single most important caveat. Nothing is redundant and every sentence earns its place.

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 values need not be explained, and the lone optional parameter is fully covered by the schema. The staleness warning fills the main interpretive gap. Minor omission: no indication of refresh behavior or how old is 'old'.

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% and the single 'patient' parameter is fully documented in the schema (name or patient_id, when to omit), so the schema does the heavy lifting. The description adds nothing about the parameter; the age_minutes reference pertains to output, not input. Baseline 3 applies.

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 with scope ('most recent glucose reading') plus an output detail ('trend arrow'), so the agent knows exactly what it fetches. It is implicitly distinct from get_glucose_graph and get_glucose_logbook, but never names or contrasts them, so sibling differentiation is left to inference.

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 staleness caveat ('Check age_minutes...') tells the agent something about interpreting results, but there is no explicit guidance on when to prefer this over get_glucose_graph or get_glucose_logbook. Usage is implied by the word 'current' rather than stated.

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