Get weekly summary

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

Annotations already establish read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior. The description adds that it is a combined summary and lists the included metrics, which is useful context, but it does not disclose any additional behavioral nuances beyond what annotations cover.

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?

One sentence, front-loaded with the core purpose, then specifics. No filler.

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 read-only summary tool with strong annotations and full schema coverage, the description adequately conveys the tool's purpose and key output contents. Some might benefit from a note about response format, but given no output schema, the listed metrics are sufficient.

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 covers both parameters fully (athlete and week_of with descriptions). The description does not add parameter-specific guidance, but with 100% schema coverage, no compensation is needed.

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 it provides a combined view of workouts and fitness for a week, listing specific metrics (TSS, duration, CTL/ATL/TSB). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like tp_get_workouts and tp_get_fitness, which focus on individual workouts or fitness data separately.

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?

Usage is implied but not explicitly stated. The description explains what the tool returns, so an agent can infer when to use it for weekly summaries, but it does not mention alternatives or when-not-to-use, leaving some ambiguity among similar tools.

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