Season recap

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure, and it does reveal the output components and the default date range. However, it does not state whether the tool is read-only, whether it respects a selected athlete, or what happens when no data exists.

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 with no wasted words, front-loaded with the core purpose and followed by concrete output details. It is appropriately sized for the tool's complexity.

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 description is reasonably complete for a non-mutating summary tool, listing the main content of the output card and the default scope. However, with no output schema and no annotations, it leaves the athlete parameter's role ambiguous and does not clarify whether 'everything logged' is global or scoped to the current athlete.

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 75%, and the schema already documents to, from, and title defaults. The description's 'Defaults to everything logged' reinforces the date-range semantics but adds no new meaning for the undocumented athlete parameter.

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 states a clear purpose: produce a single card summarizing a whole period with totals, a heatmap, an hour-of-day histogram, trophy case, longest streak, and biggest session. This distinguishes it from list_activities and log_activity, though it does not explicitly differentiate it from snapshot.

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 gives no explicit guidance on when to use recap versus sibling tools like snapshot, leaderboard, or list_activities. It mentions a default scope ('Defaults to everything logged'), but this is a parameter behavior rather than usage routing.

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