get-all-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 states the tool fetches history and can return either a list or summary statistics, but does not disclose that it may make multiple API calls (as indicated by maxApiCalls), pagination behavior, or the read-only nature beyond the verb 'Fetches'. It also doesn't mention potential quota impact or how results are limited.

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 concise at two sentences, front-loaded with the main verb and resource, and includes the key optional behavior (summaryMode) without unnecessary detail. Every word earns its place.

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 tool has 8 parameters and no output schema, and the description alone is minimal. While the schema explains parameters well, the description does not explain pagination, how many API calls are made, or the exact return structure beyond 'list' or 'aggregated statistics'. It is adequate but not complete for a complex tool without annotations or an output schema.

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?

The input schema description coverage is 100% with detailed explanations for each parameter (e.g., maxApiCalls default and purpose, summaryMode behavior). The tool description adds a high-level summary of filtering by 'date range and activity type' but does not provide detail beyond what the schema already offers. Baseline of 3 is appropriate since the schema fully documents 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 the tool fetches activity history with optional filtering by date range and activity type, and describes the summaryMode alternative. The verb 'Fetches' plus resource 'activity history' is specific and distinguishes it from siblings like get-activity-details (specific activity) or get-recent-activities (recent vs all).

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 for retrieving activity history with filters, but does not explicitly mention when to use this tool over alternatives such as get-recent-activities or get-athlete-stats. No exclusions or alternative tools are named, leaving the agent to infer the appropriate context.

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