Base Wework List User Activities

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

No annotations are provided, so description carries full burden. It does not mention pagination, heavy load, authentication requirements (access_token param is optional in schema but description says nothing about it), or rate limits. Given no annotations and a listing tool that likely paginates, this is a significant gap.

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 very concise (one sentence) and clearly conveys the core purpose. The action examples are useful and front-loaded. No fluff or repeated title. The main weakness is under-specification, but as a single-sentence summary it is efficient.

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 tool likely returns activity logs, there is no mention of what the output contains despite having an output schema. With no annotations and no parameter semantics, the description is insufficient for an agent to reliably use it across use cases. The absence of pagination or filter details is a clear gap.

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 0%, so all parameter details must rest on description. Description mentions 'user' implicitly but does not explain the other three parameters (page, access_token, items_per_page). Without any parameter clarification, an agent may misuse pagination or fail to provide required auth token. This fails to compensate for the zero coverage.

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 recent activity logs for a user in Base Wework, with examples of actions (create task, comment, mark done), which is specific enough to distinguish from other sibling tools like list user tasks or get task logs. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from all similar tools, so slight deduction.

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?

Implies it is for browsing user activity feed, but no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, nor does it mention alternatives like base_wework_get_task_logs or base_wework_list_user_tasks. Basic context is present but lacks explicit routing.

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