get-activity-details

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

No annotations are provided. The description only mentions 'get' implying read-only, but it does not disclose any behavioral traits such as authentication requirements, rate limits, data limits (despite maxChartSize parameter), or performance implications. For a data retrieval tool, this is insufficient.

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?

Single sentence, directly stating core functionality with examples. No filler words. Highly efficient.

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?

No output schema is provided. The description lists metrics but does not specify the response format (e.g., arrays of timestamps/values), date range, or how maxChartSize affects results. For a two-parameter tool, more detail on output would improve completeness.

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% (both parameters have descriptions). The description adds context by listing expected metrics but does not explain how parameters affect output beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema carries the load.

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 retrieves time-series metrics for an activity, listing specific metrics (HR, cadence, elevation, pace). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get-activity (summary) or get-activity-hr-zones (single metric), making the purpose unambiguous.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. While the listing of metrics suggests it is for detailed time-series data, the description lacks direct comparisons or exclusions (e.g., 'for summary data use get-activity'), leaving the agent to infer usage.

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