get_working_max

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden, yet it says nothing about read-only behavior, permissions, calculation method, recency of the value, or the response shape. An agent cannot tell whether this is a cheap cached read or an expensive computation.

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 definition is a single short fragment with no wasted words, but its brevity is under-specification rather than economy; there is nothing to structure or prioritize.

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?

With no annotations, no output schema, and an undocumented required parameter, the description does not come close to supplying what an agent needs to call this correctly or interpret the result.

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 0% and the only parameter, exercise_id, has no description. The phrase 'for an exercise' weakly implies that the integer identifies the exercise, but nothing explains the ID's source or format, nor what happens with an invalid ID.

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 phrase 'Current working max for an exercise' essentially restates the tool name get_working_max with one clarifying noun. It identifies the resource but gives no verb, no sense of what 'working max' means computationally, and no distinction from siblings like get_personal_records or get_exercise_stats.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus get_personal_records, get_exercise_stats, or get_exercise, all of which could plausibly surface similar numbers. Neither conditions nor exclusions are stated.

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