get_activity

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

No annotations are present, so the description must carry the burden. It only hints at 'original' data but fails to disclose typical behaviors like read-only nature, result format, or any side effects. Critical transparency is missing.

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 short but sacrifices clarity for brevity. It is under-specified rather than concise, providing insufficient information to be useful.

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?

Despite having an output schema and low complexity, the description is too sparse. It does not clarify what 'original' means or how this tool relates to sibling tools. The agent receives incomplete context for correct selection and invocation.

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 0%, requiring the description to explain parameters. The description does not mention `activity_id` or its role, adding no meaning beyond the schema's type and requirement. The parameter name is self-explanatory, but the description should still clarify intended usage.

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 'Activity basic information (original)' identifies the resource (activity) and implies a fetch operation, but it's vague about what 'basic' and 'original' mean. It doesn't distinguish from siblings like 'activities' or 'activity_detail', making the purpose ambiguous though not a tautology.

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 usage guidance is provided. The description does not indicate when to use this tool versus the many sibling tools (e.g., 'activity_detail', 'last_activity', 'get_activity_splits'), nor does it mention any prerequisites or alternatives.

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