fitbit_sync

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

No annotations provided, so description covers behavioral traits: incremental sync, first sync with days parameter, storage in SQLite, return summary. Lacks details on error handling, authentication, or rate limits, but adequate for a sync tool.

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-loaded with purpose, followed by usage order, then parameter details in Args section, and a summary of return. Every sentence is informative with no redundancy.

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?

Covers the main aspects: purpose, usage order, synergies, parameters, and return. Does not discuss authentication or prerequisites, but given output schema exists, the return description is sufficient. Slightly incomplete for full independence.

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 coverage is 0%, but description fully explains both parameters: data_types with enumerated options and comma-separated usage, days with default and first-sync-only behavior. Adds significant meaning beyond the schema.

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 it syncs Fitbit health data to a local cache, distinguishing from query tools. It uses specific verbs (sync, fetches, stores) and identifies the resource (Fitbit data) and purpose (offline queries).

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?

Explicitly advises to run this before other fitbit_get_* tools and contrasts with query tools. Explains incremental sync behavior and first sync. Provides clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use.

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