garmin_get_activity

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, which cover safety and idempotency. The description adds specific behavioral nuance about sample capping and the need for explicit request, which is valuable context beyond the annotations.

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 just two sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose and free of any filler. Every word earns its place, achieving high clarity with minimal length.

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 leaves gaps: 'capped' is vague without a specific limit, and the refresh parameter is never mentioned. For a simple tool, it is adequate but not fully complete, especially given the 0% schema coverage.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must compensate. It explains include_samples ('unless explicitly requested') but gives no detail about activity_id or refresh. activity_id is obvious from the name, but refresh remains undocumented, so the description only partially covers parameter semantics.

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 'Get one activity' uses a specific verb and resource, clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like list_activities or get_day. The phrase 'Samples are capped and omitted unless explicitly requested' further specifies the tool's scope and behavior.

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?

The description makes it clear that this tool retrieves a single activity, which inherently differentiates it from list-focused siblings. It also hints at the need to request samples explicitly, but it does not explicitly state when to avoid using it or name alternative tools.

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