routine_from_workout

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that it copies exercises and sets, drops RPE because routines don't support it, and places the routine in a folder if provided. This goes beyond a generic creation verb, although it omits potential side effects like whether the workout is modified, permissions, or error behavior.

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 two focused sentences. The first sentence states the purpose, the second adds key behavioral detail. No filler or repetition, earning a high score.

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 3-parameter creation tool with no output schema or annotations, the description covers the core behavior and important nuance (RPE drop). It doesn't mention return values or error cases, but those are less critical for selection and invocation. The main gap is the missing title parameter clarification, which is partially handled by the schema.

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 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It clarifies workoutId as an existing workout and folderId as the target folder, but does not explain the title parameter beyond the schema. This is partial compensation, leaving some ambiguity for the routine title.

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 verb 'Create' and the resource 'a new routine from an existing workout', distinguishing it from create_routine (blank) and duplicate_workout (workout-to-workout). It also specifies that exercises and sets are copied, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 usage context is implied: use when you want to convert an existing workout into a routine. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or compare with alternatives like create_routine or duplicate_workout. The note about dropping RPE hints at a limitation but doesn't provide explicit selection guidance.

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