get_collection

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the single-vs-range retrieval modes but says nothing about pagination, rate limits, auth, or how large ranges behave — the traits an agent most needs beyond the annotations.

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 tight sentences, zero filler, with the scope declared first and the retrieval modes second. Every clause carries information.

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 9-parameter, multi-route tool with no output schema, the description covers the main usage shape but its collection list is incomplete relative to the schema enum (it omits enhanced_tag, ring_battery_level, and personal_info), which could mislead an agent about availability. Pagination and response shape are unaddressed but partially implied by limit in the schema.

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 89%, so the schema already documents limit, fields, latest, dates, and document_id. The description only re-summarizes the collection list and the document_id/date-range dichotomy, adding little syntax or format detail beyond the schema. Baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a concrete verb ('Read') and resource ('any Oura v2 collection') and enumerates the collection families, which makes the tool's scope unmistakable. It stops short of naming how it differs from siblings like get_daily or get_recent_summary, so an agent must infer the boundary.

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 sentence 'One document via document_id, or a date range' communicates the two invocation modes, which is real usage guidance. It offers no when-to-use/when-not-to-use framing against get_daily, get_recent_summary, or list_collections, and no prerequisites.

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