Personal records & streaks

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, and the description adds behavioral context by listing the types of records (best/worst recovery, HRV, etc.) and the valid window range (7-180 days). This provides value beyond the annotations, though it does not detail output structure or computation.

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 a single, readable sentence that front-loads the key action and lists examples. It is efficient with no wasted words, though a slightly more structured format could improve scannability.

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?

Given the single optional parameter and the existence of an output schema, the description provides a good overview of the tool's capabilities (window, types of records). It is complete enough for an agent to understand what the tool returns and how to use it.

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 schema has 0% description coverage for the 'days' parameter. The description clarifies its purpose as the window size and specifies the allowed range (7-180 days), adding meaning beyond the schema's 'Days' label.

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 retrieves 'bests, worsts, and streaks' over a customizable window (7-180 days) and lists specific examples like recovery, HRV, sleep, strain, etc. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_recoveries or get_sleeps, which focus on individual 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?

The description implies usage for viewing aggregated personal records and streaks, but does not explicitly state when to prefer this over specific sibling tools (e.g., get_recoveries) or when not to use it. Usage context is implied but not fully clarified.

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