Get Kimai Activity

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds 'This tool is read-only.' which is consistent but does not provide further behavioral context (e.g., error handling, response format). The annotations carry most of the burden, so a score of 3 is appropriate.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the key action and endpoint. Every sentence adds value without redundancy, making it highly concise and efficient.

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 read operation with rich annotations and full schema coverage, the description is largely complete. However, it lacks information about the return structure (no output schema) and does not explain what fields are in an activity, which could be useful for agents.

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 input schema has 100% coverage with descriptions for both parameters. The description does not add any additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so baseline 3 is correct.

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 reads a single Kimai activity by ID, using the endpoint '/api/activities/<id>', and declares it as read-only. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'kimai_list_activities' which lists activities.

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 for fetching a specific activity but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use versus alternatives (e.g., 'kimai_list_activities' for searching or listing). No exclusion criteria or context is given.

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