copy_workout

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses what is copied versus not copied (blocks, supersets, sets/reps/weights, cues, notes; logged results excluded) and explains the personal-session logging nuance, but it omits permissions, target-date conflict/overwrite behavior, and the actual response shape.

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 first sentence front-loads the core action, and later sentences add copy-specific behavior rather than filler. It is slightly verbose but every sentence contributes useful context.

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?

This is a mutation tool with no annotations, no output schema, and 0% parameter coverage. The description covers copy semantics but leaves out target overwrite/merge behavior, optional parameters, authorization needs, and return-value details, so important invocation context 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?

Schema description coverage is 0% for four parameters. The description only implicitly maps 'session's plan' to program_workout_id and 'another date' to to_date; optional title and team_id are never explained, nor are formats or constraints.

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 gives a specific verb, resource, and target: 'Copy a session's plan to another date.' It clearly implies duplication rather than creation, but never names siblings like move_workout or create_session, so sibling differentiation is left implicit.

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 provides some applicable context: coach sessions work if visible, and logged personal sessions copy values typed during logging. However, it does not explicitly say when to use copy_workout instead of move_workout, create_session, or create_workout, nor does it state exclusions.

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