list_activities

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. The verb 'list' implies a read-only operation and the filter values add useful context, but the description does not explain default limit behavior, what a null sport_type returns, pagination, or response shape.

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 sentence that front-loads the primary action and resource, then adds the key filtering detail. There is no filler or redundant repetition of the schema.

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 simple list tool with no required parameters and an output schema, the description is largely sufficient: it says what is listed and how to filter. Some context is left implicit, such as default limit behavior and when a caller should switch to the detail getter tools, but the schema and sibling names cover part of that gap.

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 schema has no descriptions for its parameters, so the description adds value by enumerating the valid sport_type filter values: running, walking, cycling, fitness, or workout. However, it does not clarify the 'limit' parameter or how filtering interacts with it.

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 operation ('List') and resource ('imported activities'), and gives concrete filter categories. It is distinguishable from the sibling get_activity_* tools because it describes a list view rather than a specific activity detail, though it does not explicitly contrast with those tools.

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 the tool is for listing imported activities and optionally filtering them by sport type. It does not explicitly say when to use this tool versus get_activity_summary, get_activity_track, or other siblings, nor does it provide exclusion cases.

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