Get activity streams

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, establishing a safe read operation. The description adds meaningful behavioral detail beyond annotations: downsampling to max_points and the intentional response size management ('keep the response small'). This gives the agent awareness of response shaping behavior.

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, front-loaded with the core purpose. It efficiently includes the endpoint, examples of stream types, and the key downsampling behavior. No unnecessary words or repetition.

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 provides sufficient context for a read-only data-fetching tool: it specifies the resource, the data types, and the downsampling behavior. With good annotations and full schema coverage, the description is adequate for an agent to select and invoke the tool. However, there is no output schema, so the description could be slightly richer in describing the response structure, but the stream types enumerated give a good sense.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description mentions max_points in the context of downsampling, but all parameter semantics (id, keys, max_points) are already fully documented in the schema. No additional meaning is added beyond the 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's purpose: 'Time-series data for an activity' with specific stream types (heart rate, power, speed, altitude, cadence). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like laps, zones, comments, and kudoers, which serve different data needs. The inclusion of the endpoint '(GET /activities/{id}/streams)' further reinforces the specific resource.

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 time-series activity data but does not explicitly state when to use it over alternatives. It provides context about downsampling ('Streams are downsampled to max_points'), but no direct comparison to siblings like strava_get_activity_laps or strava_get_activity_zones. This is adequate context without explicit exclusions.

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