Garmin Activity Details

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

Annotations already declare the tool as read-only, non-destructive, and idempotent. The description adds value by noting 'when available', which implies that not all activities have detailed samples, and this is not captured in annotations.

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, efficient sentence with no wasted words. It is front-loaded with the verb 'Get'. However, it is very brief and could be slightly expanded to improve usefulness.

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?

Despite having an output schema to document return values, the description is too minimal. It does not explain what 'samples' are or how they relate to other activity data, leaving gaps for a tool that retrieves detailed information.

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?

The input schema provides decent descriptions for parameters (67% coverage), including enums for privacy_mode and response_format. The tool description itself adds no parameter information, so it contributes little beyond the schema, earning a baseline score.

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 it retrieves 'detailed Garmin activity samples', distinguishing it from the sibling tool 'garmin_get_activity' which likely provides summary data. However, it could be more specific about what 'samples' entails (e.g., time series 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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus the many sibling tools, nor does it mention alternatives or conditions for use. The single sentence lacks context for selection.

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