Strava MCP Server

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses key behaviors: format conversion (TCX) and file saving to local directory. However, it doesn't mention authentication requirements, rate limits, error conditions, or what happens if the directory doesn't exist.

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?

Single sentence efficiently conveys purpose, format, and destination without redundancy. Every word earns its place, and the information is front-loaded with the core action.

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 tool with no annotations, no output schema, and a single parameter, the description covers the basic operation well. However, it lacks details on authentication needs, error handling, and file naming conventions, which are important for a file export tool.

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% for the single parameter 'routeId', so baseline is 3. The description adds value by contextualizing the parameter as 'a specific Strava route' and implying it's used for export, elevating the score above baseline.

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 specific action ('Exports'), resource ('a specific Strava route'), format ('in TCX format'), and destination ('saves it to a pre-configured local directory'). It distinguishes from sibling 'export-route-gpx' by specifying TCX format.

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 when exporting a route in TCX format, but doesn't explicitly state when to use this versus 'export-route-gpx' or other route-related tools. No guidance on prerequisites like authentication or directory configuration is provided.

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