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

Annotations already declare read-only and idempotent behavior. The description adds that it returns a short text summary alongside the visual view, which is useful behavioral detail beyond the annotations, though it does not cover error cases or side effects (which are already implied safe by annotations).

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 tight and information-dense: it states the output, default behavior, targeting capability, and a usage preference, all in two sentences without redundant wording.

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 simple single-parameter read-only tool with an output schema, the description provides sufficient context: what the user sees, how to target a date, and the relationship to the interactive app. Nothing essential is missing.

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?

The single 'date' parameter is fully described in both schema and tool description, including format (YYYY-MM-DD), optionality, and default behavior. Schema coverage is 100%, and the description adds meaningful usage context beyond the bare 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?

Clearly states action ('Show'), resource ('single logged workout session's exercises and sets'), and format ('inline card'), distinguishing it from list tools and get_workout by emphasizing the visual/interactive rendering.

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?

Explicitly instructs to prefer this tool over text descriptions when the user asks about a workout, and contrasts it with alternative presentation methods. The optional date parameter and default behavior are also specified.

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