get_templateRetrieve a full workout template by its UUID, including associated blocks and exercises. Returns an error if the template ID is not found.
Return one workout template with its blocks and template-exercises joined. Pass the UUID from list_templates. Returns an error if the template is not found.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| templateId | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The readOnlyHint annotation already signals no side effects. The description adds value by disclosing the join behavior and the error condition when the template is not found.
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?
Two tight sentences, with the core action front-loaded and no filler. Every sentence adds useful information.
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 single-parameter read tool with readOnlyHint set, this is nearly complete. It covers what is returned, how to obtain the ID, and the error case. It doesn't describe the full response structure, but the lack of an output schema makes that a minor gap.
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 coverage is 0%, so the description carries the burden. It compensates by explaining that the parameter is a UUID from list_templates, giving the agent actionable semantic context beyond the raw schema type/format.
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 states a specific verb ('Return'), a precise resource ('one workout template'), and what is included ('blocks and template-exercises joined'). It is clearly differentiated from siblings like list_templates and get_planned_workouts.
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?
It clearly tells the agent to pass the UUID obtained from list_templatesaine and states the not-found error behavior. It doesn't explicitly enumerate alternatives, but the source-of-ID guidance gives clear usage context for this single-parameter tool.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.