List recoveries

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds behavioral context: it returns specific metrics, orders newest first, and defaults to a 14-day range. No contradiction exists.

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 with essential information front-loaded: the action, resource, fields, ordering, and defaults. Every sentence adds value.

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 existence of an output schema, return values need not be explained. However, with 0% schema coverage and 3 parameters, the description should mention the limit parameter and possible pagination. The default 14-day range is useful but not complete.

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 description explains the start and end parameters with concrete allowed values (today, yesterday, etc.), which are not in the schema. However, the limit parameter is not described, and with 0% schema coverage, this is a 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?

The description clearly states the tool lists recovery records with specific metrics (recovery %, HRV, etc.) and specifies newest-first ordering. While it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like get_recovery_trends, the focus on individual records is implied.

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?

It provides default behavior (last 14 days) and acceptable date formats for start/end. However, it lacks guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives (e.g., get_recovery_trends) and doesn't mention the limit parameter's role or limitations.

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