Activities in a date range

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

Annotations already mark this as read-only, so the description's main added value is the default window and ordering ('oldest first'). It does not address pagination, limits, or what happens when only one bound is provided, but given the readOnlyHint and simple nature, this is acceptable.

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?

One sentence, front-loaded with the resource and scope, no filler. Every word 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?

While an output schema exists and annotations cover safety, the description omits critical invocation details (date string format, meaning of null params, activity_type values). For a tool with 0% schema description coverage, this is too sparse to enable confident correct usage without external assumptions.

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%, so the description carries the burden of explaining `start`, `end`, and `activity_type`. It only vaguely references a 'date range' and a default, leaving date formats, inclusivity, and activity-type values undocumented. The agent is not told how to format `start`/`end` strings or what `activity_type` accepts.

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 identifies the resource ('Activities') and the filtering dimension ('date range'), and adds ordering information. However, it does not differentiate from siblings like garmin_activities or garmin_last_activity, so an agent might have to inspect those to choose correctly.

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 usage for retrieving activities within a specified date range and notes the default (last 7 days), giving context. But it does not explicitly state when to use this over sibling tools, nor any exclusions such as 'for a single activity use garmin_activity'.

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