Get activity laps

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

Annotations already cover readOnly/idempotent/openWorld, so the bar is lower, but the description adds a real cost disclosure: "Two Garmin requests." It also previews the shape of the summary (avg pace, halves comparison, fastest/slowest), which is behavioral context beyond the hints, though it does not discuss pagination or failure modes.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the return payload, then routing, then cost. Nothing redundant and no 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?

With an output schema present, return values need not be detailed, yet the description still frames what the summary contains and which sibling handles the non-lap case. Nothing an agent needs to invoke it correctly is missing.

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% and there is only one parameter, whose description already points at list_activities as the id source. The description adds no syntax or format detail beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource (return the laps of a run or ride) plus the swim variant (pace per 100 m/yd), and explicitly distinguishes itself from the sets-based sibling. An agent can tell what it returns without opening the schema.

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?

Gives an explicit when-not rule (strength sessions have sets, not laps: use get_activity_sets) and names the user question it answers ("did my pace hold up?"). Alternative routing is unambiguous.

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