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

Annotations already cover read-only, idempotent, safe behavior. Description adds useful context: returns at most limit, default/max limits, truncation via total_count, and optional folder filtering. Goes beyond structured fields without contradiction.

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?

Front-loaded with purpose and fields, efficiently states limits and filtering. Slightly verbose but every sentence adds information; no wasted words.

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?

Covers the tool's function, output fields (though output schema exists, so less critical), pagination/truncation behavior, and exclusion of details. Given annotations already handle safety, this is nearly complete; missing only explicit alternative tool guidance.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. Description repeats limit defaults and folder_name optionality, adding little beyond the schema. No extra syntax or format details.

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?

Clear verb (List) and resource (workout templates) with explicit scope: high-level summary fields. Distinguishes from get_workout_detail by stating it excludes individual exercises and sets, though it doesn't name the sibling directly.

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?

Implies usage for getting a summary list, but doesn't explicitly say when to use this vs get_workout_detail or search. The exclusion note provides some context but no clear when-to-use or alternative routing.

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