Apply training plan

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

The description discloses the copying behavior and the date-offset calculation, which adds context beyond the annotations' readOnlyHint/idempotentHint. It does not discuss duplication if applied multiple times, but the annotations already signal non-idempotency, so the added value is sufficient.

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 two concise sentences with the core action front-loaded. It contains no redundant filler and efficiently delivers the key behavioral information.

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 complexity, annotations, and full schema coverage, the description is adequate. It explains the core operation and the athlete parameter. It could mention what happens on success (e.g., returning calendar entries), but that is not required given the output schema is absent.

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 descriptions already cover all parameters (100% coverage). The description mentions the athlete parameter and start_date but largely repeats schema info. It adds minimal extra meaning, so baseline 3 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 action ('Apply') and the specific resource ('training plan'), and further explains the mechanism: copying each plan workout to start_date + its relative day. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like tp_get_training_plan or tp_list_training_plans, which are read-only.

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 provides context by explaining the action, but it does not explicitly indicate when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention exclusions or prerequisites. Usage is implied rather than spelled out.

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