get_activities

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must bear the burden. It states it lists activities (read operation) and includes pagination, but does not disclose behavioral traits like result limits, error conditions, or whether changes are destructive. It adds minimal value beyond the obvious.

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 short and front-loaded with the main purpose. The parameter explanations are concise. However, it could be slightly more structured, but overall it is efficient with no wasted words.

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 30 sibling tools, the description needs more context to differentiate. It lacks output schema details (though output schema exists), and does not hint at use cases. For a list tool with many similarities, it is not fully complete.

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 the description must compensate. It explains that 'start' is a zero-based index and 'limit' is maximum 1-100, which adds meaning beyond the schema's defaults and types. This is adequate but not rich.

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 'List recent activities, newest first.' It specifies the verb (list) and resource (activities) with ordering, making the purpose clear. However, it does not explicitly distinguish from siblings like get_activities_by_date or get_last_activity, which also list activities but in different ways.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. There is no mention of when not to use it, prerequisites, or comparison with other list tools like get_activities_by_date or get_activity_details. This leaves the agent without context for selection.

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