Get Activities

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states it retrieves a list, which implies a read operation, but does not mention authentication requirements (e.g., apiKey), default date ranges, pagination, or whether the response includes full activity data or just summaries. It adds little beyond what the schema already provides.

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, focused sentence that immediately states the purpose. There is no wasted text, and it is appropriately front-loaded.

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 absence of an output schema and annotations, the description must provide context about return values and tool behavior. It only says 'list of activities' without indicating the fields, default limits, or whether it returns full details or just identifiers. This could lead to incorrect tool selection, especially with sibling tools like get_activity_details available.

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 100%, so the parameters are already well documented. The description's mention of 'date range' aligns with startDate and endDate but does not add new meaning to limit, apiKey, or athleteId. It meets the baseline but does not elevate parameter understanding beyond the schema.

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's function: 'Ambil daftar aktivitas latihan seorang athlete dari Intervals.icu dalam rentang tanggal tertentu' (Get a list of an athlete's training activities from Intervals.icu within a date range). It specifies the verb (get), the resource (list of activities), and the scope (date range), distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_activity_details or get_activity_streams.

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 provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that get_activity_details is for individual activity details or that filtering is limited to date range. The usage is only implied by the purpose, not stated.

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