get_daily_steps

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

With no annotations provided, the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It only states the function (get steps) and expected input format, but omits whether the operation is read-only, what data is returned, or any constraints like rate limits. The lack of behavioral context is a significant gap.

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 concise and front-loaded with the main purpose in the first sentence. The Args section follows directly. However, it could be slightly more efficient by integrating format notes into the schema, but overall it is well-structured and brief.

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 tool with 2 required string parameters and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not explain what the returned data looks like (e.g., per-day totals, units) or any aggregation details. The description covers only input semantics, leaving the output unexplained.

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 0%, so the description adds meaning by specifying the date format (YYYY-MM-DD) and clarifying that 'start' and 'end' define the period. This provides needed semantic context beyond the schema's bare type and title.

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 action ('Get'), the resource ('summarized daily steps'), and the scope ('over a specified period'). It is specific but does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'get_steps_data', though the 'summarized' qualifier hints at a distinction.

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. It does not state when not to use it, nor does it mention any prerequisites or context for choosing this tool over siblings.

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