Polar Daily Activity

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint as false, covering safety and idempotency. The description adds the requirement for 'activity:read' scope, which is useful beyond annotations. However, no further behavioral traits are disclosed, such as pagination behavior or rate limits, leaving some 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 extremely concise with two sentences, no superfluous words. It front-loads the core action and includes essential permission info. Every sentence 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?

Given the 8 parameters with detailed schema descriptions, output schema exists, and annotations provide safety guarantees, the tool is well-documented contextually. The description could add contextual context about when it is appropriate to use compared to other list tools, but overall completeness is high.

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 high (88%), so the schema already documents parameters well. The description does not add additional parameter meaning beyond what is in the schema; it only adds a general permission note. 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 clearly states 'List Polar daily activity records', specifying the verb 'List' and the resource 'daily activity records'. It distinguishes from siblings by focusing on daily activity, but does not explicitly differentiate from other list tools like list_training_sessions, which is acceptable given the specific resource.

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 only mentions 'Requires activity:read', which is a permission requirement. It provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it specify when not to use it. No explicit when/when-not/alternatives are provided.

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