fitbit_get_activity

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It fully discloses that data comes from a local cache by default, that live=True fetches from the Fitbit API, explains rate limit implications, and defines how active_minutes is composed. This is excellent transparency.

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 reasonably concise, with a clear topic sentence and subsequent details. Each sentence adds value, though there might be slight redundancy (e.g., 'Returns one entry per day'). Still, it is well-structured and front-loaded.

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 presence of sibling tools, no annotations, and an output schema, the description adequately covers return values (steps, calories, active minutes, distance), explains the composition of active_minutes, and provides usage context. It is complete for the tool's 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?

Schema coverage is 0%, meaning the input schema has no parameter descriptions. The description compensates fully by explaining each parameter: start_date with examples ('YYYY-MM-DD', '30d'), end_date, and live with default and effect. It adds significant meaning beyond the schema.

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 it returns daily activity summaries (steps, calories, active minutes, distance), which is a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like fitbit_get_exercises or fitbit_get_heart_rate by focusing on daily activity summaries.

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?

It provides guidance on using the cache by default and when to use live=True, including a note about rate limits. It also recommends running fitbit_sync first. However, it does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools for when to use this vs. others, but the context is clear.

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