list_activities

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that exported_only controls an internal flag and notes the debug-only nature of listing all activities. However, it does not mention any potential side effects, authentication requirements, or error conditions.

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 with an Args block, no redundancy, and the purpose is stated first. It is efficient and well-structured.

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?

The description covers the tool's action and parameter details. An output schema exists, so missing return format is acceptable. The context of sibling tools helps differentiate. A minor gap is the lack of examples or edge cases, but overall it is sufficient.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description provides meaningful context for both parameters: 'package' is defined as the target package name, and 'exported_only' is explained with its default and effect. This adds value beyond the bare 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 the tool lists activities of a package and their required permissions. It distinguishes from siblings like list_providers, list_receivers, and list_services, which target other components.

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 explains the package parameter and the exported_only flag with its default behavior and impact. It implicitly guides when to use the tool (for listing activities) and how to filter results, though it doesn't explicitly contrast with alternatives.

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