get_activities

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It reveals a 100-item cap, concise output, and inclusive date filtering, but does not disclose ordering, pagination, error behavior, or date format requirements.

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?

A single sentence that front-loads the action and key constraints. Every clause adds information, with no filler or redundancy.

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?

The presence of an output schema covers return values, and the tool has only three optional parameters. However, the description leaves ambiguity around date format and ordering, and it does not distinguish this tool from get_recent_activities, which is a closely related sibling.

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 maps 'up to 100' to limit and 'inclusive date range' to start_date/end_date, but it fails to specify the expected date format or the default behavior more clearly than the schema already does.

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?

States a clear action (list) and resource (activities), with useful scope details: up to 100, concise, and optional inclusive date range. It is distinguishable from singular get_activity and compare_activities, though it does not explicitly contrast with get_recent_activities.

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?

No when-to-use or alternative guidance is provided. The optional date range implies a use case, but the description does not say when to prefer this tool over get_recent_activities or other sibling tools.

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