Get club

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the HTTP method (GET) which is a useful behavioral detail, but it does not disclose other traits like error behavior, data freshness, or authentication requirements. This is acceptable given the tool's simplicity and annotation coverage.

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 a single concise sentence: 'Details of a single club (GET /clubs/{id}).' It is front-loaded, contains zero fluff, and every word serves a purpose.

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 simple get-by-id tool with one well-documented parameter, strong annotations, and no output schema, the description is adequately complete. 'Details' implies the return of the club object, and the endpoint clarifies the operation. It could be slightly richer by naming what details are returned, but it is not insufficient.

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%, and the description does not add any parameter-specific meaning beyond what the schema already provides. The 'id' parameter is fully documented in the schema, so the description adds no extra value here.

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 a specific verb+resource: 'Details of a single club' and includes the endpoint 'GET /clubs/{id}'. This distinguishes it from sibling tool strava_list_clubs, which lists multiple clubs.

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 usage context is implied by 'single club' — use this when you need a specific club's details, as opposed to listing clubs. However, no explicit alternatives, prerequisites, or exclusions are mentioned, so guidance is only implied rather than stated.

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