List Hevy Workout Events

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real value by disclosing that results are event records of two kinds (update and delete) and that the feed is time-windowed and paged. It stops short of stating event ordering, retention window, or whether deletions include the deleted payload — meaningful for a sync feed.

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 efficient sentence with the scoping constraint ('since an ISO timestamp') placed after the core action. No filler, though the 'update/delete events' and 'with timezone' constructions are compressed enough to require a second read.

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. For a three-parameter read-only listing tool, the description covers the action, the resource, the event types, and the required timestamp format — enough for an agent to invoke it correctly.

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 meaning, and it does clarify the required 'since' parameter as an ISO timestamp with timezone. It says nothing about 'page' or 'page_size' beyond their defaults in the schema, leaving pagination semantics (and whether page numbers shift as new events arrive) undocumented.

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 ('Get a page') and a precisely scoped resource ('workout update/delete events since an ISO timestamp'), which distinguishes it from list_hevy_workouts (full workout records) by naming the event types it returns. It does not explicitly call out that sibling, so differentiation is inferable rather than stated.

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 'since an ISO timestamp' phrasing implies an incremental/polling sync use case, which is the natural when-to-use signal. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to choose this over list_hevy_workouts or get_hevy_workout, and no stated exclusions or prerequisites beyond the timestamp requirement.

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