strava_athlete_zones

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already communicates that this is a safe read operation, and the description's 'Fetch' aligns with that. The description adds the scope of 'authenticated athlete' but does not disclose additional behavioral details like response format or that no parameters are needed.

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 a single, focused sentence that immediately states the verb and resource. There is no filler, redundancy, or unnecessary detail.

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 no-parameter read-only tool, the description fully covers what the agent needs to know to select and invoke it: it fetches heart-rate and power zones for the authenticated athlete. The sibling list provides enough contrast, and the annotation covers the safety profile.

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 tool has zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to explain about inputs. The schema coverage is effectively 100%, and the description still adds meaning by specifying exactly what data is returned.

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 uses a specific verb ('Fetch') and names the exact resource ('the authenticated athlete's heart-rate and power zones'). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like strava_activity_zones, which target activity-specific zones.

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 phrase 'authenticated athlete's' implies this is for the user's own zones rather than activity-level zones, so usage context is somewhat clear. However, it does not explicitly state when to choose this over strava_activity_zones or other athlete-related siblings.

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