Get peaks

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

Annotations already establish read-only and idempotent behavior. The description adds context about period-based aggregation and PR type mappings, but it incorrectly claims the default days is 90 while the schema states 3650, and it does not describe the return format or pagination.

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 tightly written sentences front-load the core action, then provide compact PR-type details and a cross-reference. No filler or redundancy.

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?

The description covers the main purpose, period, PR types, and a key alternative, but lacks information about the returned data structure and contains a default-value mismatch. Given no output schema, a bit more detail about the expected result would improve completeness.

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 description enriches the days parameter as a period and maps PR types to sports, which is useful given only 50% schema coverage. However, the wrong default for days and the lack of elaboration on the athlete parameter weaken its semantic contribution.

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 tool retrieves an athlete's top performances filtered by sport and PR type over a time period. It also explicitly differentiates from tp_get_workout_prs, making its unique purpose unambiguous.

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?

It gives direct usage guidance by specifying the period-based context and explicitly names tp_get_workout_prs as the alternative for single-workout PRs. This is a clear when-to-use vs. when-not-to-use statement.

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