get_activity_data

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not mention whether the operation is read-only, how defaults are handled, what timezone applies, or any other behavioral traits beyond listing data fields. The 'Use last_minutes' hint is the only behavioral note, leaving significant gaps.

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 concise, using only two sentences. It is front-loaded with the primary purpose, and every sentence adds value. It avoids redundancy with the schema while providing necessary context.

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 the lack of an output schema, the description does list key return metrics, which is helpful. However, it does not explain how time filters interact, whether the returned data is aggregated, or what the default behavior is for missing parameters. The description is adequate but not fully complete for a tool with four optional parameters and no output schema.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds a small tip about last_minutes but does not contribute additional meaning to date, start_time, or end_time beyond their schema descriptions. This meets the minimum viable level without exceeding it.

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's function: retrieving activity and movement data, listing specific metrics like step count, active minutes, VO2 max, and activity level classification. This distinguishes it from sibling tools such as get_recovery_score or get_temperature_data, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 does not indicate when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it specify exclusions or prerequisites. The only guidance is a note to use last_minutes for recent data, which is a parameter tip rather than tool-selection guidance.

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