getEffortsBySegmentIdList Segment Efforts - Returns a set of the authenticated athlete's segment efforts for a given segment. Requires subscription.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| per_page | No | ||
| segment_id | Yes | ||
| end_date_local | No | ||
| start_date_local | No |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, covering safety. The description adds the requirement of a subscription and restricts results to the authenticated athlete's efforts, providing useful context on access and data scoping.
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 two sentences, front-loaded with the purpose and followed by the subscription requirement. No redundant information or filler; every word contributes.
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?
With four parameters, no output schema, and no explanation of pagination or date filtering, the description provides only a high-level overview. It misses key usage details an agent needs to invoke the tool correctly, especially since schema coverage is 0%.
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 coverage is 0%, so the description should explain parameters like per_page, start_date_local, and end_date_local. It only addresses segment_id via 'for a given segment' and leaves the other three parameters undocumented, failing to compensate for the schema's lack of descriptions.
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 clearly states the tool lists the authenticated athlete's segment efforts for a specific segment. The verb 'List' and resource 'segment efforts' distinguish it from siblings like getSegmentEffortById, which returns a single effort.
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 use for retrieving all efforts for a segment but does not explicitly mention alternatives like getSegmentEffortById for a single effort, or any exclusions. Usage context is implied rather than explicitly stated.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool targets a distinct resource and operation: segments, clubs, gear, athlete, routes, and stats. Even potentially similar tools like getEffortsBySegmentId and getSegmentEffortById are clearly differentiated by their descriptions (listing efforts vs. fetching a single effort).
All tool names follow a consistent camelCase pattern with a verb (get, explore) followed by a specific noun phrase. Names like getClubById, getLoggedInAthlete, and getStats are uniform and predictable, making it easy to infer their purpose.
With 13 tools, the server is well-scoped for a focused read-only API over Strava data. The count is within the ideal range and each tool covers a meaningful aspect of the domain without redundancy or bloat.
The tool surface covers several Strava domains (clubs, segments, gear, routes, athlete stats) but is missing any activity-related operations (e.g., list activities, get activity by ID) and all write operations. This creates notable gaps for a comprehensive Strava integration, though the read-only scope may be intentional.