Workout Events (sync)

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds meaningful context beyond this: the tool returns a delta set of workouts updated or deleted since a timestamp, which is a key behavioral trait for an incremental sync flow.

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 a single sentence that is front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by the usage recommendation. No unnecessary words or repetition, achieving high information density.

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?

The description covers the primary use case and is aided by strong annotations, but it omits details about the response format (e.g., event structure, whether it includes workout objects or just IDs) and pagination behavior. With no output schema, these gaps make the description only partially complete for an agent to reliably invoke and process results.

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 only 33% (only 'since' has a description). The description clarifies the purpose of 'since' (incremental sync filtering) but does not compensate for the undocumented 'page' and 'pageSize' parameters. Low coverage requires the description to step up, and it does so incompletely.

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 clearly states the tool returns workout events (updates/deletions) since a timestamp, with the explicit goal of incremental sync. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like hevy_get_workouts (full list) and hevy_get_workout (single workout) by emphasizing the delta-based scope.

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 explicitly says 'use for incremental sync rather than re-reading everything,' providing a clear when-to-use directive and contrasting with the alternative of fetching the full workout set. Though no sibling is named, the guidance is unambiguous.

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