Icu Get Recent Activities

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, non-destructive and openWorld, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds value beyond that by disclosing the response shape is deliberately lightweight and enumerating the summary fields, which tells the agent this call is cheap and not a full-detail fetch. It does not mention pagination or rate limits, keeping it short of a 5.

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?

Two short sentences: the capability and its output shape come first, then the disambiguation. Every clause carries information, and the quoted user phrasings are compact and directly usable.

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?

An output schema exists so return values need not be explained, annotations cover the safety profile, and the schema fully documents all three optional parameters. The description fills the remaining gap that structured fields cannot express: what the summary contains and which sibling to pick instead.

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% with all three params documented, so the baseline is 3. The description only echoes the default window (last 30 days) that days_back already declares in the schema, adding no new meaning for limit or athlete_id, so no credit above baseline.

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 ('List the athlete's most recent activities') with explicit default scope (last 30 days) and a concrete characterization of the payload ('LIGHT summary per item' naming distance, duration, power, HR, training load). It also names the two sibling tools it is not, so the agent can distinguish it without opening any 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 explicit trigger phrasing ('what have I done recently?', 'show last week's rides') and routes alternatives by condition: 'For one specific activity by ID use icu_get_activity_details; to search by name/tag use icu_search_activities.' Both the when-to-use and the when-to-use-something-else are present.

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