List my Strava activities

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 discloses this is a listing operation scoped to the authenticated athlete and returns them in reverse chronological order, which is useful behavioral context. However, it doesn't disclose pagination behavior, number of results returned without pagination, or whether activities include full detail or are summaries.

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?

Single sentence, zero wasted words, front-loads the core purpose. It's appropriately concise but could arguably add a footnote about pagination without excessive bloat.

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?

For a list tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description is functional but minimal. It covers the core purpose and ordering but lacks guidance on pagination defaults, result caps, or how it relates to the get_activity sibling. Parameter count (4) is moderate and all are documented, but behavioral completeness is thin.

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 the schema already documents all 4 parameters (page, after, before, per_page). The description adds no new parameter semantics beyond what's in the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate since schema fully handles parameter documentation.

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 verb (List), resource (authenticated athlete's activities), and scope (reverse chronological order). It distinguishes from siblings (get_activity retrieves a single activity, get_my_profile retrieves profile) reasonably well, though it doesn't explicitly name them as alternatives.

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 implies this returns a list of the authenticated user's own activities, and page/per_page params signal pagination usage. However, it doesn't explicitly state when to use this vs. get_activity (which presumably returns a single activity by ID), and gives no guidance on pagination strategy or rate limits.

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