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

The readOnlyHint annotation already establishes this as a safe read, so the description only needs to add context. It contributes the endpoint mapping (GET /activities/{activityId}) and the shape of the payload, but says nothing about error behavior for a missing id, auth requirements, or whether nested sub-resources are expanded.

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?

Two compact sentences, zero filler, with the core verb-and-resource statement front-loaded before the return contents and endpoint reference.

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?

There is no output schema, so naming the returned fields serves as the return-value sketch, and the endpoint reference anchors it in the API. Only edge-case behavior (missing activity, permissions) is absent, which is minor for a simple read.

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 100%, with both activity_id and the language default documented in the schema itself. The description adds only 'by id' and repeats nothing about the language parameter, so baseline 3 applies.

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 and resource ('Get one activity by id') and enumerates what is returned (description, schedule, price categories, settings). This distinguishes it from list-style siblings like trekksoft_list_activities, though the contrast is only implicit in the word 'one'.

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 'by id' phrasing implies this is the detail-fetch follow-up to a list call, and the schema notes the id comes from trekksoft_list_activities. However, the description itself gives no explicit when-to-use or when-not guidance versus the sibling list/get tools.

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