create_activity

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses key traits: the activity is private (visibility constraint), free (cost implication), and has a character limit (max 64 characters). However, it lacks details on permissions, error handling, or response format, leaving behavioral gaps.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by a clear Args section. Every sentence adds value: the first states what it does and key constraints, the second lists parameters with useful details. No wasted 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?

Given no annotations and no output schema, the description is moderately complete. It covers the creation action, privacy, cost, and parameters, but lacks information on return values, error cases, or integration with siblings. For a 2-param tool with minimal structured data, it's 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 must compensate. It adds meaning: activity_name has a max length constraint (64 characters) and description is optional, which aren't in the schema. This covers both parameters well, though it doesn't detail format or validation rules.

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 verb ('Create') and resource ('custom PRIVATE activity'), specifying it's visible only to the user's account and free. It distinguishes from siblings like list_activities (which lists) and start_session (which starts sessions). However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from other potential creation tools, keeping it at 4.

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 creating private activities, but doesn't explicitly state when to use this vs alternatives like list_activities or start_session. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned, leaving some ambiguity about context.

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