get_athlete

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It does not disclose authentication requirements, rate limits, or side effects. For a read operation, it fails to state that no changes are made, leaving behavioral traits unclear.

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, front-loaded sentence with no extraneous words. It is perfectly concise and structured efficiently for the AI agent.

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 has no parameters and an output schema exists, the description is mostly complete. It identifies the key return fields. However, it could mention authentication context or the fact that it's read-only, which 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?

There are no parameters (0 params), so schema coverage is trivially 100%. The description adds no parameter info, which is acceptable. Baseline for 0 params is 4, and the description provides useful context about return fields.

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 the Strava profile, specifying fields (name, location, global stats). It uses a specific verb 'Récupère' and resource 'profil Strava', distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_activity_detail.

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 to fetch the authenticated user's profile ('ton profil'), but it lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, or any when-not scenarios. 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.