preview_strength_workout

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full disclosure responsibility. It states 'no network call', explains it resolves names, and returns warnings and a token, giving good insight into behavior. It could explicitly state it never modifies data, but the term 'preview' and 'no network call' strongly imply safety.

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 with a clear structure: purpose first, then what it returns, then usage instruction. Every sentence adds value, and the Args section is well-organized.

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 description covers all necessary aspects: what it does, what it returns (summary, resolved names, warnings, confirmation_token), and when to use it (before create_strength_workout). Given an output schema exists (but not shown), the description sufficiently describes the return values, making it complete.

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 0%, but the description provides a high-level explanation of the workout parameter (name, blocks, sets, exercises) and how it is resolved. This adds context beyond the schema's property descriptions, helping the agent understand the parameter's role.

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 assembles a strength workout and shows what would be created without a network call, distinguishing it as a preview step. It mentions resolving exercise names and returning a summary and confirmation token, which clearly describes its purpose.

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 explicitly states 'Always call this first and review the result' and references the sibling tool create_strength_workout by mentioning passing a confirmation_token to it. This provides clear when-to-use guidance.

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