garmin_activity

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

Annotations already declare this as a safe, idempotent read operation. The description adds useful behavioral context that common GPS fields are removed, which is important for an agent interpreting the returned data. It does not cover permission requirements or error behavior, but those are less critical here.

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 wasted wording. It covers the operation, returned data, and a key caveat in compact form.

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 low complexity, existing output schema, and safety annotations, the description covers the essential content and the GPS-field omission. The main missing piece is guidance on sourcing the activity_id parameter, which slightly limits 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 single required activity_id parameter has 0% schema description coverage, so the description must compensate. It only implies that the integer identifies 'an activity' and does not explain how to obtain or format the activity ID, leaving a meaningful gap.

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 states a specific read operation on a single activity and enumerates the returned content: summary, measurements, and splits. It also distinguishes itself from the plural garmin_activities sibling by being explicitly singular and detail-oriented.

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?

There is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus garmin_activities or garmin_activity_workouts. The singular name and 'an activity's' wording imply per-activity detail, but no alternative, prerequisite, or exclusion is stated.

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