get_activity_intervals

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the behavioral burden. It discloses the data content and that intervals are 'detected' (implying derivation), but does not state read-only nature, pagination, limits, or behavior when no intervals exist. Adequate but not rich.

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 tight paragraphs, front-loading the core purpose and adding useful context without fluff. Every sentence earns its place.

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 no output schema, the description lists the returned metrics and explains the tool's utility. It is largely complete for a lookup tool, but could specify the return structure (e.g., an array of lap objects) and edge cases (e.g., activity without intervals).

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 tool description does not explicitly explain the activity_id parameter beyond the phrase 'inside one activity'. It implies the parameter identifies the activity but doesn't clarify format or source, failing to compensate for the schema 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 clearly states the tool retrieves 'laps and detected intervals inside one activity' and lists specific metrics (distance, duration, pace, HR, power, zone). It distinguishes itself from siblings like get_activity (summary) and get_activity_streams (raw streams) by focusing on structured lap/interval data.

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?

Provides clear guidance on when to use it: 'Use it to see how a session was structured' and 'This is where interval execution shows up.' It implies a specific use case but does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, so it stops short of a 5.

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