get_scaling_activities

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

Annotations already indicate read-only, non-destructive, and idempotent behavior. The description adds that it retrieves 'scaling activities', which is a specific behavioral trait beyond what annotations provide (e.g., not just general cluster info). No contradictions.

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, concise sentence that immediately states the tool's purpose without extraneous words. Every word adds value, and it is front-loaded with the action and resource.

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 tool's moderate complexity, the description is complete enough: it specifies the resource (scaling activities for a server group in a cluster) and the required context (Spinnaker). With annotations already covering safety and consistency, the description doesn't need to elaborate on return values (no output schema).

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 clear parameter descriptions. The description adds no additional semantics beyond what the schema already provides (e.g., it doesn't explain how parameters relate to scaling activities). Baseline 3 is appropriate given full schema coverage.

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 verb ('Get') and resource ('scaling activities for a server group in a Spinnaker cluster'), which differentiates it from sibling tools like get_cluster or list_server_groups that retrieve different data. It specifies the exact scope (server group in a cluster), avoiding ambiguity.

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 when you need scaling activities for a server group, but it does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs. alternatives like list_server_groups or get_cluster. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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