garmin_search_exercises

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the full behavioral burden. It only states the search operation and does not disclose output format, error handling, whether results include both categories and exercises, pagination details, or any other behavioral traits. This is a notable gap for a tool with zero annotation coverage.

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 sentence with no redundant words. It front-loads the core purpose and is easily parseable by an agent. Every word earns its place.

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 search tool with fully documented schema and an output schema present, the short description is mostly adequate. However, the lack of usage differentiation from siblings and absent behavioral details mean an agent cannot fully judge when to use it or what to expect from results.

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%, with both parameters clearly described in the schema ('term' provides examples, 'limit' defines max results and constraints). The tool description adds no extra parameter meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Search' with a specific resource, 'Garmin's strength exercise catalog', and clearly states the goal of finding 'valid category/exercise identifiers'. This makes the tool's purpose clear, though it does not explicitly differentiate it from sibling tools like garmin_exercise_categories or garmin_resolve_exercise.

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: use this tool when needing to search for valid exercise/category identifiers. However, it provides no explicit guidance about when to prefer this tool over siblings, when not to use it, or how it fits into a larger workflow with related tools.

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