execute_activity

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavior. It states the tool waits for a result, indicating blocking behavior, but does not mention idempotence, side effects, timeout handling, or what happens on failure. Basic transparency but lacks depth.

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, clear sentence with no fluff, front-loading the key purpose. While concise, it could be slightly expanded to cover behavioral details without losing brevity.

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 no output schema, the description should hint at the return value or result structure. It only says 'wait for result' but not what form the result takes. Missing context about timeout, errors, or activity lifecycle makes it incomplete for a transactional tool.

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%, so each parameter already has a description. The tool description adds no additional semantic meaning beyond the schema, meeting the baseline expectation.

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?

Description clearly states 'Execute a standalone Temporal activity and wait for result', specifying the verb, resource, and behavior. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'start_activity' (which likely does not wait) and 'get_activity_result' (which retrieves results separately) by emphasizing the synchronous wait.

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 usage for running an activity synchronously, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., start_activity followed by get_activity_result). 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.