garmin_delete_workout

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true. The description adds the behavior that deletion only occurs when confirm=True, and that without confirmation it returns a warning. This goes beyond the annotations by specifying the safety mechanism.

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 brief and includes sections (main, SEGURIDAD, Args, Returns). It is not overly verbose, though the Args section could be omitted as the schema already defines parameters.

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 return type (confirmation or error message) and the safety confirmation. For a simple delete tool, this is adequate. It could mention error cases (e.g., workout_id not found) but the given information suffices.

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% per context (though schema has descriptions), so baseline is 3. The description merely lists parameter names and types without adding semantics beyond what the schema provides.

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 explicitly states the verb 'Borra' (delete) and the resource 'entreno guardado de tu biblioteca de Garmin', clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like garmin_list_workouts (list) and garmin_schedule_workout (create).

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 highlights a critical safety guideline: 'requiere confirm=True. Sin confirmacion no borra nada.' It implicitly tells when to use (delete) but does not provide explicit exclusions or alternatives. However, the context of sibling tools makes the usage clear.

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