Icu Search Activities

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, non-destructive. The description adds genuinely useful context beyond that: it labels the response as a LIGHT payload and contrasts it with a heavier alternative, which helps an agent reason about cost. It does not discuss rate limits or authentication, but output shape is covered by the output schema.

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 what is returned, then the routing decision. No filler and every sentence carries distinct information.

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 annotations covering the safety profile, a 100%-covered schema, and an output schema handling return values, the description supplies everything an agent needs: purpose, result shape, default choice, and escalation path.

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 limit, query, and athlete_id are already documented in the schema. The description restates the query semantics ('name or tag') without adding format, matching behavior, or scope guidance beyond what the schema provides. 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?

The description names a specific verb and resource ('Search activities by name or tag') and immediately states the result shape (id, name, type, date, distance, time). It explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling icu_search_activities_full, so an agent can route without opening either 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 default ('Use this first for "find my X" queries') and a precise escalation condition naming the alternative tool and the exact data that justifies the heavier call (power, HR, training load, intensity factor). Both when-to-use and when-not-to-use are covered.

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