Get workout note

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint false, covering the safety profile. The description adds only the 'private' qualifier, which is a modest behavioral trait, but it does not disclose additional context such as authentication requirements, error conditions, or what to expect when no note exists.

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 a single concise sentence that immediately states the tool's purpose. It is well-front-loaded and contains no fluff or repetition, earning a perfect score for conciseness and structure.

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 read-only getter with no output schema and strong annotations, the description is sufficiently complete. It clearly defines the resource being fetched (the private workout note) and the target (a workout), which is all the agent needs to invoke the tool correctly. No additional return-value details are strictly necessary for such a straightforward 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?

The schema describes the 'athlete' parameter fully, but 'workout_id' has no description. The tool description does not add any parameter semantics beyond what the schema gives, and with a schema coverage of 50%, it fails to compensate for the undocumented parameter. The agent is left to infer what a workout ID is or how to obtain it.

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 ('Get') and the resource (the private workout note for a workout), which precisely distinguishes it from sibling tools like tp_set_workout_note (which sets a note) and tp_get_workout (which retrieves workout details). The inclusion of 'private' adds specificity about the type of note.

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 implies usage: you use this tool when you need the private workout note for a given workout. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives (e.g., tp_get_workout_comments for comments, or tp_get_workout for broader workout data), nor any mention of when not to use it.

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