get_personal_records

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It mentions 'across all activities' but fails to explain how personal bests are defined (e.g., all-time vs filtered), data freshness, or any rate limits. The lack of detail for a read operation is a notable gap.

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 a single, clear sentence with no wasted words. It is appropriately front-loaded and efficient.

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 no parameters and an output schema exists, the description is minimally adequate. However, it lacks behavioral context and usage guidance, which is incomplete considering the large number of sibling tools.

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?

There are zero parameters, so the description naturally doesn't add parameter info. Per guidelines, no parameters yields a baseline of 4. The description is acceptable but could confirm that no input is required.

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 retrieves personal best records across all activities. The verb 'Get' and resource 'personal best records' are specific. It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_activities or get_max_metrics which serve different purposes.

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 usage for retrieving personal bests, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_max_metrics or get_activities. There are no exclusions or context about when not to use it.

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