get_scheduled_workouts

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful scope by clarifying that it covers Garmin calendar entries for a month, including 'other items,' but it does not disclose pagination, calendar semantics, or whether completed/planned items are included.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted text. For a simple two-parameter read tool, this is appropriately sized and easy to scan.

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?

With a rich schema, an output schema, and annotations covering safety and openness, the description supplies enough context to call the tool correctly. Its main remaining gap is sibling differentiation, since it does not explicitly contrast itself with list_workouts or scheduling tools.

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 100%, and the schema itself documents that year and month default to the current values. The description reinforces the monthly scope but adds no parameter syntax or meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 identifies a specific resource: workouts and other items on the Garmin calendar. It implies retrieval for a month, which distinguishes it from workout-template tools like list_workouts, but it lacks an explicit verb and the phrase 'other items' is vague.

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 states what the tool returns but gives no when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no comparison to siblings such as list_workouts or schedule_workout. The monthly calendar context implies its purpose but does not explicitly guide selection among alternatives.

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