Set workout note

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

The description adds minimal behavioral context, essentially restating the action. Annotations already declare idempotentHint=true, readOnlyHint=false, and destructiveHint=false, which provide the safety profile. No additional behavioral traits (e.g., overwriting behavior, auth requirements) are disclosed beyond the schema's note about athletes.

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?

Single sentence, no unnecessary words, front-loaded with the action. Very concise.

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 setter tool with good schema coverage and annotations, the description is adequate. It lacks any mention of return values or related read tool, but the essential purpose is clear.

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 2 of 3 parameters (note and athlete) with descriptions; the description itself does not explain parameters. It adds no meaning beyond the schema, such as clarifying that workout_id is a target identifier. Given 67% coverage, the description does not compensate for the missing workout_id description.

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 uses a specific verb 'Set or update' and identifies the resource 'private workout note' for a workout. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like tp_get_workout_note (read) and tp_add_workout_comment (comment).

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as tp_get_workout_note. The description implies usage for setting/updating a note, but does not mention when not to use it or point to related tools.

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