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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, so the base safety profile is covered. The description adds valuable behavioral detail beyond annotations: no pagination, grouping of repeated workout IDs within weeks, and cross-week reuse semantics. This helps the agent understand the exact response structure and implications.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose, then adds necessary behavioral details about pagination and grouping. Every sentence contributes meaningful information for correct invocation, and there is no redundant fluff.

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?

Given the tool's moderate complexity, the description covers all essential aspects: the compact plan nature, full week retrieval, grouping behavior, workout reuse semantics, and the routing rule for get_workout_detail. With an output schema present, no further return-value explanation is needed.

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 100%, with program_id described as the stable id returned by get_programs. The description adds little param-specific meaning beyond confirming it refers to a saved program, so the schema carries the semantic weight as expected.

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 clearly states the tool retrieves one saved program's complete compact plan, distinguishing it from program listing tools by emphasizing full plan details without pagination. It also explicitly contrasts with get_workout_detail, making its purpose unambiguous.

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 provides explicit when-to-use guidance by stating to call get_workout_detail once per unique workout_id only when workout names or contents are needed. This directly routes the agent between the two sibling tools, leaving no ambiguity about which tool to select.

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