create-routine

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 the tool creates a routine, requires title and exercises, and returns the new ID. However, it does not mention potential side effects, permissions, or constraints like folder existence, leaving some behavioral gaps for a creation tool.

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 concise, with four short sentences that front-load purpose and requirements. Every sentence adds value: action, requirements, optional feature, and return value, with no redundant or vague phrasing.

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 tool's complexity (nested exercises and sets) and lack of output schema, the description covers main points but misses details like notes parameter, folder existence requirement, and specific return structure. It is adequate for basic use but not fully comprehensive.

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 description adds important constraint that exercises must have sets, which is not in schema required fields. It also notes optional folderId. However, it omits any description of the 'notes' parameter and does not fully compensate for the 0% schema coverage, as it only covers 2 of 4 parameters in meaningful depth.

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 creates a new workout routine in Hevy, using a direct verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like create-workout (logged session) and create-exercise-template by specifying 'workout routine' and mentioning optional folder assignment, which hints at the routine folder hierarchy.

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?

It provides usage context by specifying requirements ('requires a title and at least one exercise with sets'), but does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or compare to alternatives like create-workout. The implicit differentiation is clear but lacks direct exclusions.

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