get_activity

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

Annotations already establish that this is a safe, read-only, idempotent operation. The description adds useful context about what the response contains, including FIT-file-derived laps, legs, and HR-zone data, but does not explain performance implications, missing-file behavior, or other operational details.

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 compact sentence that front-loads the core action and then lists the returned content. It is appropriately sized and contains no wasted language.

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 tool has full parameter schema coverage, an output schema, and clear read-only annotations. The description is complete enough for an agent to understand the tool's scope and returned data, though it could be slightly stronger with explicit guidance about when to choose this over sibling tools.

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 fully documents both parameters. The description reinforces that lap/leg/HR-zone data comes from the FIT file, but it does not add parameter-specific syntax or semantics beyond what the schema already provides.

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 that this tool returns a single activity in detail, including summary metrics, planned workout, multisport legs, laps, and HR-zone time. It implicitly distinguishes itself from list_activities by emphasizing one activity, though it does not explicitly name or contrast with that sibling.

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?

Usage is implied: this is the detail-fetch tool for a specific activity, while list_activities would be used to find activity IDs. However, the description does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or mention prerequisites such as obtaining an ID first.

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