Get Routine

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds valuable behavioral context about the update workflow (that updates replace the entire routine), which is beyond the annotations and helps the agent understand the tool's role in a multi-step process.

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?

Two sentences, both information-dense. The first states the core function, the second adds a critical usage warning. No fluff or repetition.

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 get-by-id tool with one required parameter, rich annotations, and no output schema, the description covers the essential workflow context and safety profile. Nothing critical is missing for an agent to select and invoke this tool 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?

The schema has one parameter, routineId (string, minLength 1), with no description coverage. The description only says 'by id', which adds minimal meaning beyond the parameter name itself. Since there is only one parameter and its purpose is self-evident, the description does not need extensive compensation, but it also provides no extra format or sourcing guidance.

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 'One routine by id' with a specific verb and resource, clearly distinguishing from the sibling hevy_get_routines (plural). It also immediately signals the tool's role in the update workflow, making its purpose unmistakable.

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 description provides explicit when-to-use guidance: 'Always fetch this before hevy_update_routine — updates replace the entire routine.' This directly addresses the usage context and differentiates it from the update tool, offering a clear workflow directive.

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