Get Hevy Routine

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered elsewhere. The description adds only that the response bundles the routine with its exercises; it says nothing about behavior when the ID does not resolve or about any pagination/truncation of the exercise list.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with the verb, resource, scope and lookup key in order, and no filler. Nothing can be trimmed without losing information.

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-value documentation is unnecessary, and annotations cover safety for this simple one-parameter read. The remaining gaps are the parameter's format/provenance and the not-found behavior, which for a minimal lookup tool are noticeable but not disqualifying.

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% for the single required parameter routine_id, so the description must carry the meaning and it does not. 'By ID' restates the field name without indicating where the ID comes from, its format (UUID vs opaque string), or whether it must be a saved-routine ID rather than a workout or template ID.

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 gives a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('a saved routine') and adds scope detail ('and its exercises'), which separates it from mutation siblings like update_hevy_routine and from list_hevy_routines. It does not explicitly name the alternative it replaces, so it falls short of a 5.

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 only usage signal is the phrase 'by ID', which weakly implies this is the lookup path when an identifier is already known. There is no guidance on choosing it over list_hevy_routines or get_hevy_workout, and no stated preconditions.

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