list_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 the required input (sector slug) but does not mention any behavioral traits such as pagination, filtering, error handling, or what is returned (e.g., IDs vs. names). This is minimal disclosure for a tool without annotation support.

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 two concise sentences, front-loaded with the core action and immediately followed by the prerequisite. There is no wasted wording or irrelevant detail.

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?

Considering the tool's simplicity (one parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description adequately covers purpose and prerequisite. However, it leaves the return format unspecified, which could be a minor gap for a list-returning tool. Still, the context is complete enough for the low complexity.

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 single parameter sectorSlug is fully described in the schema with 'Slug of the sector (from list_sectors)', and the description repeats this dependency. Since schema coverage is 100%, the description adds no major new meaning, just reinforces the source of the slug.

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's purpose: listing activities (sub-categories) within a given sector. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like list_sectors (which lists sectors) and list_companies_by_activity (which lists companies by activity).

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 explicitly mentions the prerequisite of needing a sector slug from list_sectors, providing clear context on when this tool should be used (i.e., after obtaining a sector slug). It does not explicitly exclude alternatives, but the dependency is clearly stated.

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