Statistiques de l'athlète

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

With no annotations, the description reveals it is a read-only retrieval (km summaries) but does not mention authentication requirements, potential errors, or that it returns data only for the authenticated athlete. It is adequate but leans on the tool name for context.

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?

A single sentence with 15 words, front-loaded with the action verb 'Récupère' (retrieves). No wasted information.

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?

The description clearly lists the returned data (kilometers by week, month, year, all-time) which is complete for a simple stats tool. However, it could note that it returns stats for the authenticated athlete, but that is implicit in the tool name.

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?

No parameters exist, so schema coverage is 100%. The description does not need to add parameter details. Baseline 3 applies.

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 it retrieves global Strava statistics for distances across four time periods. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like strava_get_activities which retrieves individual activities, and strava_training_load which focuses on training load.

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 use for obtaining overall distance stats but does not explicitly contrast with alternatives or state when to prefer this tool. No when-not or prerequisites are provided.

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