Create library

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

Annotations indicate that this is a non-read-only, non-destructive mutation, and the description aligns by saying 'Create'. It adds value by clarifying the library starts empty and that the operation returns a library_id. No contradictions with annotations are present.

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 sentences and every part earns its place: it defines the tool, clarifies the empty state, mentions the return value, and points to the next logical tool. No unnecessary words or repetition.

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 simple creation tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description is sufficiently complete. It explains the core behavior, the return value, and the next step. It does not cover error cases or permission requirements, but these are not critical for a straightforward create operation.

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 50%: the 'name' parameter lacks a description, and the tool description does not explain it. The 'athlete' parameter is already described in the schema. The description adds no parameter-specific information, leaving the required 'name' parameter without guidance beyond its type.

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 specific action (create), the resource (an empty workout library), and its purpose (a folder for reusable templates). It distinguishes this tool from tp_create_library_item by noting that empty libraries are created here and templates are added separately, and it also mentions the return value.

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 clear usage context by indicating that after creating the library, templates should be added using tp_create_library_item. This implies the intended workflow and differentiates from the sibling. It does not explicitly state when not to use this tool, but the guidance is sufficient for a simple creation tool.

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