Inspect FIT-derived power coverage

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It explicitly states 'Read-only,' which is a key safety trait, and discloses the data source ('Garmin FIT-derived power'). It does not mention return format or rate limits, but those are less critical for a read-only report.

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?

Three short, purposeful sentences cover purpose, data source, and safety. There is zero redundancy and the key information is front-loaded. It is a model of conciseness.

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 core purpose and read-only safety but omits what the report actually returns (e.g., format of the inventory), how date parameters work, and details on the `sourceQuality` enum. For a 5-parameter tool with no output schema, the description is minimally adequate but has clear gaps.

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 0%, so the description should compensate. It only addresses 'sport or sport family' (mapping to `sport` and `sportFamily`) but says nothing about `startDate`, `endDate`, or `sourceQuality`. Parameter semantics are largely missing, leaving agents guessing about date filtering and the sourceQuality enum.

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 uses the verb 'Report' and specifies the resource: powered activities and the complete duration-best inventory for a sport or sport family. It also differentiates itself from siblings by stating 'Uses Garmin FIT-derived power, not sparse activity summaries,' making it clear what makes this tool distinct.

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 says the tool is for an 'explicit sport or sport family' and contrasts with 'sparse activity summaries,' giving context on when to use it. However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools or provide a full when-not-to-use list, so it falls short of a 5.

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