get_activity_streams

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

With no annotations, description carries full burden. It discloses return type (dictionary indexed by stream type) but omits potential errors, side effects, or permissions. However, as a read operation, the transparency is adequate.

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?

Concise docstring format with Args and Returns sections, no redundant information. Every sentence adds value, appropriate length for a simple tool.

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?

Despite no annotations and output schema existing, description covers both parameters and return structure sufficiently for a low-complexity tool. No gaps in understanding usage.

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 coverage is 0%, so description must add meaning. It explains activity_id as ID, stream_types as comma-separated list with default and available types (heartrate, pace, etc.), adding significant value beyond schema.

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?

Description clearly states verb 'Get' and resource 'stream data for a specific activity' with examples. Distinguishes from siblings by specifying 'stream data' as opposed to activity metadata or lists.

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?

Description implies usage for retrieving activity streams but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_activity_by_id or get_recent_activities. No exclusionary guidance provided.

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