get_daily_cardiovascular_age

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not mention that this is a read-only operation, nor does it hint at pagination via the next_token parameter, rate limits, or authentication needs. The description focuses solely on the meaning of the metric, leaving the agent to infer operational behavior from the tool name and schema.

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, tight sentence that leads with the action and resource, then provides essential context. There is no filler or redundancy, making it efficiently scannable for an agent.

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 that the tool is a simple query with optional parameters and an output schema exists, the description covers the core purpose and meaning of the data. It does not explain return structure, but that is handled by the output schema. The only gap is the absence of usage guidance, which is penalized separately; for the data itself, the description is sufficient.

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%, with all three parameters (start_date, end_date, next_token) fully documented in the schema. The description adds no additional parameter-level detail or context beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline of 3 is appropriate given the schema's thoroughness.

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 verb 'Get' with a specific resource 'cardiovascular age' and explains it as Oura's estimate of vascular age from pulse wave velocity. This distinguishes it from the many sibling daily-metric tools like get_daily_activity or get_daily_stress, leaving no ambiguity about what this tool retrieves.

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. There is no mention of conditions, prerequisites, or scenarios that would favor this tool over the similarly named get_daily_* siblings. The only hint is the phrase 'to compare against actual age,' which suggests a purpose but does not offer explicit selection criteria.

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