List Workout Templates

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, which covers safety. The description adds meaningful behavioral context: it filters out deleted templates and returns counts rather than full objects. It does not discuss pagination or ordering, but for a simple list that's a minor gap. No contradiction with annotations.

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 sentences, zero filler. The first sentence states the core behavior and output; the second routes to the alternative for more detail. The key information is front-loaded and 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 zero-parameter list tool with readOnly annotation, the description fully covers what an agent needs: it states the filter (non-deleted), the output (block/exercise counts), and how to get more detail if needed. No output schema exists, but the description explains the return semantics sufficiently. Nothing essential is missing.

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?

There are no parameters, so the schema is trivially complete. The baseline for 0 params is 4. The description does not need to add parameter details because none exist; it adds value by describing what the returned data contains.

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 opens with a precise verb and resource: 'Return all non-deleted workout templates' and specifies what data is included (block and exercise counts). It clearly differentiates from get_template by stating the scope (all vs. specific) and the level of detail (counts vs. full detail). No ambiguity about what the tool does.

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 explicitly tells the agent when to use the sibling instead: 'Use get_template to fetch a specific template's full detail.' This gives a clear condition for choosing between list_templates and get_template, and the sibling is named. While it doesn't list every alternative, it addresses the most relevant one for this resource.

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