list_exercises

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

No annotations are provided, so description carries full burden. It describes a read operation with no side effects, but lacks details on ordering, pagination, or data freshness. For a tool with no parameters, this is minimally acceptable.

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?

A single sentence that is efficient and front-loaded. Could be slightly more descriptive about the available metrics, but overall well-structured and 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?

Given 0 parameters and an output schema, the description is brief but sufficient for a simple list. However, it does not differentiate from siblings like get_workout_history or explain the meaning of 'available metrics', leaving some ambiguity.

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?

No parameters exist; schema coverage is 100% trivially. Per calibration, baseline is 4 for 0-param tools. Description adds no parameter info but none 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 the action (List), resource (exercises), and scope (all tracked) with available metrics. It distinguishes from siblings like get_exercise_progress or get_workout_history by indicating a comprehensive list rather than a specific progress or history view.

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 guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., get_exercise_progress, get_workout_log). No context about prerequisites or typical use cases is provided.

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