strava_activity_streams

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the read-only safety profile is covered. The description adds a little context by scoping what stream types are available, but it does not disclose response shape, payload size implications, or the raw-vs-sampled behavior beyond what the input schema already says.

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. It names the action, the resource, and the key data types efficiently.

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?

For a tool with five parameters and no output schema, the one-liner is minimally sufficient but incomplete: it does not describe the response structure or how raw streams and sampled streams differ in practice. The schema covers parameter meanings, but return semantics are left implicit.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all parameters. The description mostly repeats the default stream key list already present in the `keys` parameter description and adds no additional semantics for `maxPoints`, `keyByType`, or `includeRaw`.

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 an imperative verb ('Fetch') with a specific resource ('activity stream samples') and enumerates the stream types: time, distance, altitude, heartrate, cadence, watts, and lat/lng. This makes it clearly distinct from sibling tools like strava_activity_detail or strava_activity_laps even without naming them.

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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or provide exclusions. It implies usage when stream-level sample data is needed, but the agent is left to infer the decision from the resource name rather than receiving explicit routing guidance.

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