get_workout_history

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and does well by disclosing date interpretation in local timezone, multiple workouts per day, and the instruction to report every workout. It lacks mention of authentication or rate limits, but the behavioral details provided are strong.

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 concise and well-structured: a clear purpose sentence, output description, date behavior details, a usage tip, and an important warning. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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?

The tool has 5 parameters, all documented, and no output schema. The description explains return fields (date, exercises, duration, completion status) and covers key behaviors. It is missing default sort order and error handling for invalid dates, but overall it is complete for a filtered list tool.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds significant value by explaining date formats in detail, giving a usage example for single-day queries, and clarifying timezone handling, which goes beyond the schema's parameter descriptions.

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 tool retrieves recent workout history with optional filtering, using a specific verb (Get) and resource (workout history). It distinguishes from siblings like get_workout_detail by specifying it returns summaries, not details.

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 explains when to use the tool (getting recent history with filters) and provides usage tips like how to query a single day and warning about multiple workouts per day. It does not explicitly state when not to use it, but the context of sibling tools implies alternatives.

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