get_activities

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure but offers almost no behavioral context. It does not mention pagination behavior, rate limits, response format, or whether results are cached vs. real-time.

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 single sentence wastes no words and is appropriately front-loaded, but is so terse that it under-delivers value for a 6-parameter tool with multiple siblings.

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?

For a tool with 6 filtering/pagination parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, a one-sentence description is inadequate. It lacks context on parameter relationships (e.g., mutual exclusivity of user_id vs filter_id) and output structure.

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?

Input schema has 100% description coverage, documenting all 6 parameters including pagination and filter options. The description adds no parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides, meeting the baseline score of 3 for high-coverage schemas.

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 the specific verb 'Get' with resource 'list of activities' and source 'Pipedrive', making the basic purpose clear. However, it fails to distinguish from sibling tool 'get_activity' (singular), which likely retrieves a single activity rather than a list.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus 'get_activity' or 'get_activities_summary', nor does it mention when filters should be applied versus retrieving all activities.

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