search_activities

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It clearly states that past activity instances are not in the search index, which is a key behavioral constraint. However, it does not mention other behaviors like rate limits, authentication requirements, or pagination details beyond what's in the schema.

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 and well-structured, with only three sentences. It front-loads the core purpose and immediately provides filtering capabilities, then adds important exclusions and alternatives. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy.

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 11 parameters, 100% schema coverage, and no output schema or annotations, the description provides essential context about what is searched (current activities) and what is not (past). It could mention the pagination behavior (page parameter, 20 per page) to be fully complete, but it is still quite thorough.

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 covers all 11 parameters with descriptions (100% coverage). The description adds a summary of filter types but does not provide deeper meaning or usage examples beyond the schema. Since schema coverage is high, a score 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 the tool searches currently-published outdoor activities on mountaineers.org, including upcoming trips, course field trips, and clinics. It also distinguishes from sibling tools by specifying that past activities are not in the index, directing users to get_activity or get_member_history for those cases.

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 explicitly tells when to use this tool (searching current/upcoming activities) and when not to (past activities not indexed). It lists alternative tools (get_activity, get_member_history) for historical data, providing clear usage boundaries.

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