list_custom_exercises

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

With no annotations, the description must convey all behavioral traits. It only states it lists custom exercises, but omits details like whether it is read-only, pagination behavior, or what happens if no exercises exist. The tool is simple, but the description is too minimal.

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, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. Every word contributes to the purpose.

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 simplicity (no parameters, output schema exists), the description is mostly complete. It could mention that it returns only custom (not built-in) exercises, but overall it suffices for safe invocation.

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?

There are no parameters, and schema coverage is 100%. The description adds value by specifying 'created by the user,' implying user-specific filtering, which is not evident from the schema alone. A baseline of 4 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 clearly states the verb 'List' and the resource 'custom exercises created by the user,' distinguishing it from sibling tools that list programs, blogs, or home charts. It is specific and 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 does not provide any guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It offers no context on prerequisites, exclusions, or situations where another sibling tool would be more appropriate.

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