get_floors

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

Since annotations are absent, the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It reveals the 15-minute breakdown granularity but omits details like return format, destructiveness, authentication needs, or rate limits. For a read-only getter, the disclosure is adequate but minimal.

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 sentence that efficiently communicates the tool's purpose, resource, and key detail (15-minute breakdown). No extraneous words or repetition.

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 provides sufficient information: what data is returned (floors climbed/descended), the filter (specific date), and the granularity (15-minute breakdown). No critical gaps remain.

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 schema provides 100% coverage with a description for the single parameter (date). The description adds 'for a specific date,' which does not surpass the schema's information. By the baseline rule for high schema coverage, a score of 3 is appropriate.

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 retrieves floors climbed and descended for a specific date with a 15-minute breakdown, specifying verb (Get), resource (floors climbed/descended), and granularity. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_daily_steps or get_steps_data.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_daily_steps, get_steps_data, or other health metrics getters. The description does not mention context or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage without assistance.

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