Garmin Activity Details

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds 'when available,' hinting at conditional availability of samples, but does not disclose how privacy_mode or response_format alter behavior, or what happens if samples are unavailable.

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 a single, short sentence (7 words). While concise, it is too terse to provide sufficient context for a tool with 4 parameters and an output schema. Could be improved without becoming verbose.

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 existence of many sibling tools with similar purposes, the description lacks key context about what specific data this tool returns (e.g., sample-level data, GPS points) and how it differs from others. The output schema exists but the description does not bridge the gap.

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 75%; all parameters have individual descriptions. The tool description does not add any additional meaning beyond the schema. With high coverage, baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 states 'Get detailed Garmin activity samples when available.' It identifies the verb and resource but is vague about what 'detailed' means and lacks differentiation from sibling tools like garmin_get_activity or garmin_get_activity_splits.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as garmin_get_activity, garmin_get_activity_splits, or other activity detail tools. The description provides no context about appropriate use cases or prerequisites.

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