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

Beyond the read-only, non-destructive annotations, the description discloses default active-only filtering, how to retrieve hidden sports, the restricted use of the settings-row id, and the structured-workout flag requirement. These are substantive behavioral details an agent would not infer from annotations alone.

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 information-dense and front-loads the core purpose, with every clause serving a practical purpose. However, the long semicolon-heavy paragraph makes some details harder to scan than a more structured presentation would.

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 two-parameter read-only list tool without an output schema, the description covers scope, defaults, id meanings, follow-up calls, and a key domain constraint for structured workouts. Nothing essential for correct invocation appears to be 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?

Schema coverage is 100%, and the schema descriptions already explain both parameters thoroughly. The description adds useful context such as where the athlete id comes from, but most parameter meaning is already carried by the schema, so the baseline score is appropriate.

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 specific verb and resource: listing sports for a person, with default self-scope and optional athlete scope. It clearly distinguishes the tool from siblings like list_athletes and list_zones by explaining when each is relevant.

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?

It gives explicit guidance on when to use the tool, how to obtain the athlete id, how to list hidden sports for reactivation, and when to call list_zones next. It also explains how to use returned sport ids in event planning.

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