get_recent_activities

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool retrieves data for the authenticated athlete and returns a JSON string with activity summaries, but does not mention ordering, pagination, rate limits, or error behavior. It adds some context beyond the schema (e.g., max limit) but remains limited.

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 a clear summary, Args section, and Returns section. Every sentence adds value, with no redundant or fluff content.

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 tool's simplicity (2 parameters, no nested objects, output schema present), the description is mostly complete. It explains the purpose, parameters, and return type. The lack of usage guidance slightly reduces completeness, but the tool is straightforward and the output schema handles return details.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds the max value for limit (100) not present in the schema, and restates defaults, providing extra semantic value beyond the parameter descriptions.

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 gets recent activities for the authenticated athlete, with a specific verb and resource. It indicates a summary of key metrics, which helps distinguish it from get_activity_details and similar tools, though it doesn't explicitly name alternatives.

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 is provided about when to use this tool vs alternatives like search_activities or get_activity_details. The description gives context (recent activities with summaries) but does not state exclusions or recommend other tools for different use cases.

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