activity_get

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

No annotations provided. Description only says 'Get', implying a read operation, but does not disclose any behavioral traits such as side effects, authentication requirements, or performance characteristics. Without annotations, the description carries full burden and fails to provide sufficient transparency.

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 a single sentence of 8 words, very concise. However, it sacrifices informativeness. While every word earns its place, it could be more helpful without becoming verbose.

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 tool with no output schema and a sibling 'activity_get_full', the description lacks critical context. It does not specify what 'detail' includes, nor how it differs from 'full'. An agent cannot decide whether to use this tool over alternatives without additional information.

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 low (33%: only 'country' has description). Description adds no parameter information beyond 'by id or activityNo'. It does not clarify whether 'id' or 'activityNo' is required, their formats, or the relationship between them. The description fails to compensate for the poor 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?

Description states 'Get activity detail by id or activityNo', clearly specifying the verb and resource. However, it does not distinguish from sibling tool 'activity_get_full', which likely returns more detail. The purpose is clear but lacks differentiation.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'activity_get_full' or 'activity_list'. No exclusions or context provided. The description implies basic usage but does not help an agent decide between similar tools.

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