Strava Cache Status

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds value by disclosing that the cache is optional and how to enable it, which is behavioral context beyond the 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?

Two concise sentences with no fluff. Front-loaded with the core purpose immediately. Every word adds value.

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 simple status tool with output schema present, the description adequately covers purpose and enabling condition. It could mention the output format or link to output schema, but overall sufficient for agent understanding.

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 only parameter (response_format) is entirely undocumented in the description. With 0% schema coverage, the description should compensate but completely omits param details. The enum values are clear from schema, but usability is reduced.

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 shows optional local SQLite cache status with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like strava_connection_status which focus on API connection rather than cache.

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 a conditional usage hint (enable caching environment variables) but lacks explicit guidance on when to use vs. alternatives or when not to use. The condition is helpful but incomplete.

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