get_stress

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It usefully states that date_str defaults to today and specifies the YYYY-MM-DD format. However, it does not describe the response structure, timezone handling, or whether any date range limitations apply.

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 brief, front-loaded with the core purpose, and includes a clean Args section that adds parameter details without unnecessary prose. Every line earns its place.

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?

This is a simple one-parameter getter with no output schema, so the description is mostly sufficient for invoking the tool. However, it does not clarify what the returned 'all-day stress level data' looks like (e.g., summary values, time series, units), which leaves some ambiguity in interpreting the result.

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?

Although the schema only defines date_str as a nullable string with no description, the tool description fully compensates by documenting the expected format (YYYY-MM-DD) and default behavior (today). For a single-parameter tool, this is complete and unambiguous.

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 verb ('Get'), a clear resource ('all-day stress level data'), and the date scope, which immediately distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_heart_rate or get_hrv. The term 'all-day' adds useful precision beyond the tool name alone.

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 does not explain when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_daily_stats, get_hrv, or list_activities. It only implies usage by describing what the tool retrieves, with no exclusion criteria or guidance for selection.

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