list-activities

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already covers the safety profile, and the description adds the endpoint and sales:read scope. However, it does not disclose other behavioral details such as pagination behavior, ordering, or what subset of sales activities is returned.

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 short sentences with no filler: it front-loads the action and resource, then gives endpoint and scope. Every token 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?

For a simple read-only list endpoint with fully documented optional pagination parameters, the description plus schema is largely sufficient. Adding a note about the response being a paginated list would improve completeness but is not necessary for correct invocation.

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?

All three parameters (q, page, itemsPerPage) have descriptions in the input schema, so the schema covers 100% of parameter meaning. The tool description adds no parameter-specific details, keeping this at the baseline for full schema coverage.

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 a concrete action and resource—'List sales activities'—and reinforces it with the exact endpoint and OAuth scope. This clearly separates it from sibling tools like get-activity, create-activity, and update-activity.

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 GET verb and read-only scope imply this is the tool for listing sales activities, but the description does not explicitly state when to choose it over get-activity or other list_* siblings. The intended use is inferable but not explicitly contrasted with alternatives.

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