monica_activity_type

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility. It warns that 'delete is irreversible', which adds important behavioral context. However, it does not disclose other behavioral aspects such as required permissions, side effects of create/update, or response format.

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 extremely concise, consisting of two short sentences and a warning emoji. It front-loads the verb 'Manage activity_types' and efficiently conveys the action list and a critical caveat.

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?

With no output schema and six parameters, the description covers the main operations but lacks details about input constraints (e.g., required fields for create), pagination specifics, or error handling. It is adequate but leaves gaps for an AI agent to infer.

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 67%, but the tool description does not add any additional parameter meaning beyond what the schema already provides. For parameters like 'name' and 'activity_type_category_id', which have no schema descriptions, the tool description offers no clarification.

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 manages activity_types and enumerates all supported actions (list, get, create, update, delete). It distinguishes from sibling tools like monica_activity or monica_activity_type_category by focusing on the specific entity 'activity_type'.

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 lists the available actions but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternative tools. Usage is implied by the entity type, but no when-not or alternative guidance is provided.

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