get_stress

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It explicitly notes the series is capped at 48 points, a meaningful limitation, and indicates daily aggregation. However, it does not address auth, permissions, or other side effects, though the cap is a key disclosed behavior.

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 12-word sentence that front-loads the primary action and result before stating the limitation. Every word earns its place with no redundancy.

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 description is adequate for a simple tool but leaves notable gaps: parameter semantics are thin, and 'per-band durations' is not defined. The presence of an output schema covers return types, but usage and parameter details would need to be inferred from parameter names and sibling context.

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 input schema has 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate for the two parameters. It indirectly relates to `date` via 'daily' and to `include_timeseries` via 'series capped', but never explains accepted date formats or how the timeseries flag alters the response, leaving the agent to infer.

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 begins with a specific verb and resource ('Get Garmin daily average/max stress') and clearly specifies output contents ('per-band durations'), making it distinct from sibling tools focused on other metrics like sleep, HRV, or body battery.

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 implies usage context through the metric name 'stress' but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over siblings or mention any exclusions. No alternatives are named, leaving the agent to infer from the resource name.

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