Retrieve recent Garmin activities with selected metrics, newest first, excluding GPS, account fields, and raw responses for privacy-focused previews.
Recent activities, newest first. Returns selected metrics without GPS, account fields, or raw responses.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | ||
| start | No |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description still adds genuine information beyond that: the ordering guarantee ('newest first') and an explicit statement of what is excluded from the payload (GPS, account fields, raw responses), which tells the agent the result is a trimmed projection rather than full records.
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?
Two short sentences with no filler; the 'newest first' ordering is front-loaded. The brevity is efficient, though it borders on under-specification given how little else is said.
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?
An output schema exists, so return-value detail is not required, and annotations cover the safety profile. However, for a paginated list tool with two undocumented parameters and an ambiguous boundary against list_workouts, the definition leaves gaps an agent would need filled before calling it confidently.
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 coverage is 0% and the description never mentions the two parameters. 'limit' and 'start' have defaults, ranges, and obvious pagination intent from their names, but the description offers no clarification of offset behavior or page-size semantics, so it fails to compensate for the documentation 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 names the resource ('Recent activities, newest first') and the shaping of the payload, but it never states an explicit retrieval verb and never distinguishes 'activities' from the sibling 'list_workouts' / 'list_scheduled_workouts'. An agent must guess whether an activity and a workout are the same entity here.
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 when-to-use guidance, no prerequisite context, and no reference to any of the four sibling tools. The agent gets no signal about when this tool is preferred over list_workouts or search_exercises.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.