preview_workout

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/non-destructive/closed-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real behavioral context beyond that: no auth or upload side effects, and that duration totals deliberately exclude distance and repetition steps, which explains computed output rather than restating 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?

Four short sentences, each carrying a distinct piece of information (purpose, auth/upload behavior, units, nesting and totals rules). Front-loaded with the action and free of filler.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation, and the description covers the tricky structural rules an agent could get wrong. Slight gap: nothing warns about the 50-step/20-item limits or what a validation failure looks like, though the output schema likely covers the latter.

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%, so the description must carry the load, and it delivers the highest-risk semantics: pace is seconds/km and HR is bpm for target ranges, and repeats nest only one level deep. It leaves other nested fields (reps, skip_last_rest, weight_lb, sport) undocumented, but their names and enum values are largely self-explanatory.

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?

States a specific verb pair (validate and preview) against a specific resource (a workout), so the agent knows exactly what happens. It is clearly not a lister like the sibling tools, but the description never names those siblings or explicitly contrasts itself with them.

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?

"Without authentication or uploading" implies this is the dry-run path before a real create, which is useful implied usage guidance. However, no explicit when-to-use/when-not-to-use statement or named alternative is given, so the agent must infer the workflow position.

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