unschedule_workout

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

The annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, but the description adds valuable scope: only the calendar entry is removed and the saved workout remains. That clarifies exactly what the destructive action affects, though it does not mention permissions or response behavior.

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 one compact sentence with the key distinction front-loaded in the parenthetical. Every part earns its place and there is no 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?

For a simple destructive tool, the description adequately conveys purpose and scope of destruction, and an output schema exists. However, it omits parameter sourcing/format guidance, which matters given 0% schema description coverage.

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 compensate for the single required parameter, scheduled_workout_id. It does not explain the expected ID format or where to obtain it, leaving the parameter meaning to be inferred only from its name.

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 states a specific verb and resource: remove a workout from the calendar. The parenthetical '(the saved workout itself stays)' directly distinguishes this from delete_workout and other sibling mutation tools.

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 clearly implies when to use this tool: when the user wants to take a workout off the calendar while preserving the saved workout. The distinction from delete_workout is clear but not stated with an explicit alternative name, so it stops short of full routing guidance.

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