list_activities

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

The description discloses a key behavioral trait: 'Returns shallow rows (no body)', which goes beyond what the schema provides. No annotations exist, so this disclosure is valuable. However, it does not mention other behaviors like pagination limits or read-only nature, though these are partially covered by schema.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the core functionality followed by crucial guidance. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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 listing tool with 7 parameters and no output schema, the description covers key aspects: time window, filters, and the shallow vs full distinction. It does not explain pagination order or sorting, but the schema handles limits and offset. Overall adequate but could be slightly more comprehensive.

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 baseline is 3. The description summarizes parameters as 'time window' and 'source/type/person filters', but adds no new semantic detail beyond the schema. The mention of 'shallow rows' relates to output, not parameters.

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 activities in a time window with optional source/type/person filters', specifying the verb (List), resource (activities), and filtering capabilities. It explicitly distinguishes from sibling 'get_activity' by noting shallow rows and directing to use get_activity for full content.

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 clear context for using the tool: time window and filters for listing, and explicitly tells when to use a sibling tool ('use get_activity to fetch full content'). However, it does not explicitly exclude other use cases or mention alternative tools for different scenarios.

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