Get goals progress

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

With no annotations provided, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states that the tool returns 'current progress' and defaults to today, but does not mention read-only status, error behavior, or potential side effects. For a read operation, safety is implied but not explicit.

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, focused sentence (15 words) that front-loads the main purpose. Every word contributes meaning, with no redundancy or unnecessary detail.

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?

For a simple tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description is adequate. It explains the scope (per-app and overall) and default period. However, it omits details about the return format, metric units, or how progress is calculated, which would be helpful for an agent.

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% for the single parameter 'period', so baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining that progress is broken down 'per-app and overall', which is not in the schema and helps clarify the output structure. This extra context earns a 4.

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 that the tool returns 'current progress on the user's configured Vetroscope goals' and specifies 'per-app and overall', which distinguishes it from siblings like get_goal_achievements. However, the description is a noun phrase without an explicit verb, and it could be more precise about what 'progress' means.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_goal_achievements or get_current_status. It only mentions a default value for the period parameter but lacks exclusion criteria or usage context.

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