Get workout

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

Annotations already convey read-only, idempotent, safe behavior, so the description carries minimal burden. It adds no behavioral details beyond the schema (e.g., error handling, return format, or permission nuances). The 'Use after' note is a usage guideline rather than behavioral transparency, so this is adequate but not enriched.

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 short sentences, immediately front-loading the core purpose. Every word earns its place; there is no filler or redundancy.

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 fetch-by-ID tool, the description is adequately complete. It identifies the resource, the operation, and a clear usage context (after listing workouts). No output schema exists, but the description doesn't need to explain return values for such a straightforward tool. The only minor gap is not mentioning optional parameter behavior, but the schema covers that.

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 100%, so parameters are fully described in the schema. The description does not add any additional meaning or context to the parameters. Baseline 3 applies because the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 precisely states the action ('Get workout details by ID'), clearly distinguishing it from the sibling tool tp_get_workouts (which lists workouts). The phrase 'by ID' establishes the scope and the resource being operated on.

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 instruction 'Use after tp_get_workouts' provides a clear workflow context, telling the agent when this tool should be invoked. While it doesn't explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, this is sufficient guidance for a simple get-by-ID operation.

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