Get Activities

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the scope of entities returned but does not reveal behavior such as required authentication, default filtering behavior, pagination, or return format. 'Retrieve' implies a read operation, but this is not explicit.

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 immediately states the verb and resource, followed by a precise list of entities. No wasteful words or redundancy.

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 a nested filter object with many properties, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too sparse. It does not clarify required filter fields, the meaning of each sub-parameter, or the shape of the response, leaving significant gaps for an agent to invoke it correctly.

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 0%, and the description does not explain the 'filter' object or any of its nested properties. It merely lists entity type names that map indirectly to the source enum, but it does not clarify how to use dates, IDs, or boolean flags in the filter.

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 uses a specific verb ('Retrieve') and names a precise resource: the documented AMS360 activity-adjacent entities available in WSAPI v3. It further enumerates the entity types (customer suspenses, common suspenses, personal notes), which clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_client and get_policies.

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 when to use the tool by focusing on activity-adjacent entities, but it does not explicitly state when to choose this over siblings, nor does it mention any exclusions or alternatives. There is no explicit when-to-use guidance beyond the implied domain.

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