get_activities

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It states it retrieves 'recent activities' but does not define 'recent', nor does it mention what the output dictionary contains, any limitations, or whether it is a read-only operation. Minimal behavioral context beyond the basic action.

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 highly concise: a single sentence plus brief args/returns in a docstring. Every part is functional with no redundant or filler content.

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 the tool has one optional parameter and an output schema exists, the description is adequate but lacks definition of 'recent' and does not explain the return value's structure beyond 'dictionary containing activities data'. It gets a baseline score; could be improved with more context.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates by documenting the 'limit' parameter with its meaning ('Maximum number of activities to return') and default value (10). This adds significant value beyond the schema's type and default alone.

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 uses the specific verb 'Get' with the resource 'the authenticated athlete's recent activities', which clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_activities_by_date_range or get_activity_by_id. The scope is precise and unambiguous.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention any exclusions, prerequisites, or comparison to sibling tools like get_activities_by_date_range or get_recent_activities.

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