get_activities

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses pagination support but omits details such as sort order, filtering capabilities, return format, or any authentication/authorization requirements. This is minimal disclosure for a list endpoint.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence that directly states the purpose and mentions the key feature (pagination). Every word earns its place, with no redundancy or filler.

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 two-parameter list tool with fully documented schema, the description provides adequate context. However, since there is no output schema, it does not explain the response structure (e.g., pagination metadata, fields returned), which would be helpful for an agent to parse results.

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 the baseline is 3. The description's mention of pagination aligns with the page and per_page parameters, but adds no additional meaning beyond the schema descriptions, which already provide defaults and the maximum value.

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 a list of athlete activities ('アスリートのアクティビティ一覧を取得します'), which is a specific verb+resource. It is distinct from the sibling get_activity (singular vs. plural), though it does not explicitly contrast with it.

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 versus alternatives. The description only mentions pagination, implying batch retrieval, but does not state when to choose this over get_activity or other sibling tools.

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