get_recovery

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states that Garmin-provided fields are combined, but says nothing about read-only-ness, date handling, default behavior, aggregation logic, or what happens when data is missing.

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?

A single sentence with no filler, front-loaded verb, and clear enumeration of fields. It is efficient and easy to parse, though terse to the point of under-specification in other dimensions.

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?

The output schema exists, so return shape is at least represented, and the parameter surface is minimal. However, the description lacks usage guidance, date semantics, and any differentiation from overlapping siblings, leaving the agent with insufficient context to confidently select and invoke the tool.

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 0% and the description never mentions the 'date' parameter. An agent cannot infer format, meaning, or default behavior beyond the schema's default null, so the description adds no semantic value for the only 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 uses a specific verb ('Combine') and names the resource components (sleep, HRV, Body Battery, stress, RHR, readiness), making clear this is an aggregate recovery snapshot rather than a single-metric getter. It distinguishes itself from component siblings like get_sleep or get_hrv, though it does not explicitly differentiate from get_recovery_trend.

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?

There is no guidance about when to use this tool versus get_recovery_trend, get_daily_summary, or the individual component tools. The optional date parameter and its behavioral implications are also not addressed, so an agent is left to infer usage context.

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