Get Routine Folders

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, but the description itself adds no behavioral detail. It does not explain what routine folders are, what data is returned, or how pagination works. The description is purely a label and provides zero additional context beyond the annotations.

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?

The description is extremely short, but it is under-specified rather than concise. A single noun phrase is not a functional description and does not 'earn its place' as a useful sentence. Similar to the 'Process' example, brevity here is a deficiency, not a virtue.

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 the two pagination parameters and no output schema, the description should explain what a routine folder is and what the response contains. It fails to provide any meaningful context, making the tool nearly impossible to use correctly without external knowledge.

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% and the description does not mention the 'page' or 'pageSize' parameters. The agent must rely solely on parameter names and schema constraints, with no explanation of their meaning or default behavior in the context of fetching routine folders.

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 'Your routine folders.' is a possessive noun phrase with no verb. It does not state what the tool does, such as retrieving or listing folders. The title partially indicates the purpose, but the description adds no operational clarity and does not distinguish this tool from siblings like hevy_get_routines or hevy_get_routine.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description lacks context about folder organization or how it relates to routines, leaving the agent without any basis for deciding between this and sibling tools.

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