withings_activity

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure and fails to do so. It says nothing about authentication, rate limits, pagination, date-range defaults (what happens when start_date/end_date are null), or the date format expected, all of which matter for a date-ranged retrieval tool.

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?

It is a compact, front-loaded sentence that opens with the core resource and then enumerates details without filler. The trade-off is that it is a dense field dump rather than prose guidance, but it wastes no words.

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?

An output schema already exists, so the description need not explain return values—yet it spends its entire content doing exactly that, duplicating the schema. It leaves the more important gaps (implicit action, parameter formats, null-date behavior, no annotation coverage) unaddressed.

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% and the description does not mention start_date or end_date at all. It adds zero semantic value about the two parameters—no date format, no default-window behavior when null—leaving the agent to infer their meaning from the bare property names.

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 names the resource clearly as 'Daily activity summaries' and enumerates exactly what data it covers (steps, distance, calories, heart rate), which makes it distinguishable from activity-less siblings like withings_sleep or withings_devices. However, it never states an explicit action verb (e.g., 'retrieve' or 'get'), leaving the operation implicit rather than stated.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance at all: nothing says when to pick this over withings_measurements (which could overlap on activity metrics) or how it relates to withings_sleep. The reader must infer the usage entirely from the field list.

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