get_recovery_trend

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses that output is aggregated over a 7/14/28-day window, which is useful, but says nothing about permissions, whether values are smoothed/baselined, rate limits, or how the trend is computed.

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 front-loaded sentence with no filler; the metrics list and the time window are both immediately visible. Nothing is wasted.

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?

An output schema exists so return values need not be explained, and the trend window is covered. However, for a tool surrounded by many similar recovery/health siblings, the absence of any routing or scoping guidance leaves the definition only minimally 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?

Schema description coverage is 0% and the single 'days' parameter is undocumented in the schema. The description hints at acceptable values ('7/14/28 days') but never names the parameter, states its default of 7, or clarifies whether other integer values are honored.

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 specific verb ('Trend') and enumerates the concrete resources trended (sleep HR/temp, HRV, RHR, readiness, Body Battery) plus the window. The multi-metric trend framing does implicitly separate it from single-metric siblings like get_hrv or get_recovery, but it never explicitly names or contrasts those siblings.

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 when-to-use guidance. With near-identical siblings such as get_recovery, get_hrv, get_sleep and get_daily_summary, the agent is left to infer that this tool is for multi-metric trend analysis over a window rather than point-in-time reads. No exclusions or alternatives are stated.

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