get_hrv

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Get ... data' without indicating whether a daily summary, time series, or aggregated value is returned, nor mentioning availability, units, or timezone handling.

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 minimal and front-loaded, with the verb and resource in the first sentence and a compact Args block. Every word earns its place, and there is no redundant or tangential content.

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 one-parameter getter, the description is adequate for invoking the tool, but with no output schema and no annotations, it leaves the response shape undefined. A sentence describing the returned HRV data (e.g., daily value vs. series) would make it complete.

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 description adds meaningful detail beyond the schema by specifying the date_str format as 'YYYY-MM-DD' and the default value 'today', compensating for the schema's null default and 0% description coverage. This fully clarifies the sole parameter.

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 states a specific action ('Get') and resource ('heart rate variability data') with a date parameter, clearly naming HRV rather than a generic health metric. It does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like get_heart_rate or get_stress, but the subject matter is distinct enough.

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 given about when to choose this tool over alternatives such as get_heart_rate or get_daily_stats. The description only explains what the tool does, not the selection context, leaving an agent to guess among many similar health-data getters.

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