list_workouts

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses ordering, output shape, and the absence of sample series, which gives an agent a solid mental model of the result. It does not explicitly state read-only behavior, but 'List' reasonably implies it.

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?

Three sentences, each earning its place: the first states what is returned, the second explains the primary use case, and the third sets expectations about a sibling feature. The most important information is front-loaded.

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?

Given there is no output schema, the description compensates by enumerating the row fields, ordering, and the absence of sample series. It could mention pagination or limit behavior, but those are already covered by the schema's parameter descriptions.

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%, so the schema already documents all five parameters with types and examples. The description adds little parameter-level semantics beyond the schema, which matches the baseline for high coverage.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'List recorded rides' with explicit ordering ('newest first') and a precise summary of each row's contents. It clearly differentiates from siblings by noting 'Returns no sample series,' separating it from get_samples and get_workout.

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 explicitly instructs when to use the tool: 'Use this first to find the id of a ride before asking for its detail,' routing the agent to the detail sibling. It also provides an exclusion by stating it returns no sample series, which directs agents away from using it for sample data.

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