Get Hevy Routine Folder

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. The description adds nothing behavioral beyond that — no note on not-found handling, whether it reads live from the external service, or any auth requirement.

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 no filler. It could carry a bit more information without bloat, but nothing present is wasteful.

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 not be explained, and this is a simple read-only single-record fetch. Still, missing not-found/error behavior and any tie to the folder list concept leaves an agent with only the bare minimum.

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. The phrase "numeric ID" minimally restates that folder_id is the folder's numeric identifier, but adds no constraints, format, or example beyond what the integer-typed schema already implies.

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 and resource ("Get a Hevy routine folder") plus a scoping qualifier ("by its numeric ID"). It is clearly a single-record fetch rather than a list, but it never names or distinguishes itself from siblings such as get_hevy_routine or list_hevy_routine_folders.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of any alternative (e.g., listing folders instead). The agent must infer from the name alone that this is the single-folder lookup.

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