get_family_activity Get recent family activity feed.
Args:
limit: Maximum entries to return (default: 20, max: 100)
Returns:
List of recent family activities
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructive behavior, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds minimal context by mentioning 'recent' and the limit parameter, but it does not disclose what constitutes an activity, the ordering, or whether a family group must exist. It does not contradict the annotations.
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 extremely concise and well structured with Args and Returns sections. Every line carries relevant information and there is no filler or repetition of the annotations.
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?
Given the single parameter and read-only annotations, the description is adequate for the basic call. However, with no output schema, 'List of recent family activities' leaves the shape and scope of each activity unspecified, and the ambiguous 'activity' term could make selection among the many family-related tools harder.
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%, so the description must compensate. It documents limit with a default of 20 and a maximum of 100, which adds information beyond the schema (which only includes the default). For the single parameter, this is sufficient and useful.
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 clear verb and resource: 'Get recent family activity feed.' It is not a tautology and names the specific object of interest. However, it does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling getters/listers like get_family_group or list_family_members, and 'activity' remains somewhat underspecified.
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?
No guidance is given about when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of preferred use cases, exclusions, or a reference to sibling tools such as list_family_members or get_family_group. Usage must be inferred entirely from the tool name.
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.