clio_find_activities

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavior. It lacks any mention of pagination (limit, defaults), read-only nature, or response format, leaving critical expectations 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?

Single sentence, no redundancy, directly states purpose and filtering options.

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?

With no output schema or annotations, the description is too sparse for a 6-parameter list tool. It omits pagination details, default behaviors, and response structure, making it insufficient for confident invocation.

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 description lists the filter dimensions (matter, user, type, date range) which maps to the schema parameters, but only to/from are described in the schema. The description adds some grouping but does not elaborate on parameter value formats or combinations beyond the schema.

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 (List) and identifies the resource (time/expense entries) with filter criteria, distinguishing it from sibling retrieval or creation tools like clio_get_activity or clio_log_time.

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 clearly implies this tool is for listing/finding activities with optional filters, but does not explicitly state when to prefer it over alternatives like clio_get_activity for single record retrieval or clio_find_notes for notes.

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