get_activity_detail

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only says 'detailed summary' without disclosing what metrics are included, whether any side effects exist, or the response format. This is minimal behavioral disclosure for a data-retrieval tool.

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?

One concise sentence with no redundant words. It is front-loaded with 'Detailed summary' and immediately clarifies the key identifier, making it easy to scan.

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?

While an output schema exists, the description is otherwise minimal. It lacks usage guidance, behavioral detail, and sufficient parameter semantics. For a tool with one parameter and no annotations, this is adequate but leaves clear gaps in when and how to use it.

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?

The schema has one parameter with 0% description coverage. The description clarifies that the parameter is a Garmin activity ID, adding meaning beyond the bare schema. However, it does not provide format, range, or examples, so it only partially compensates for the coverage gap.

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 indicates the tool returns a detailed summary for one activity, and specifies the unique identifier (Garmin activity ID). It distinguishes this from sibling tools like get_recent_activities, though it lacks an explicit verb like 'retrieves' or 'gets'.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as get_recent_activities for listing activities. The description implies you need a specific activity ID but does not state prerequisites, use cases, or exclusions.

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