get-exercise-history

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, so description does not need to reiterate safety. The description adds 'past sets' implying historical data, but lacks details like pagination, ordering, or behavior when no data exists. The bar is lowered by annotations, but additional context would be beneficial.

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?

Single sentence, 15 words, no fluff. Front-loaded with verb and resource. Every word earns its place.

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?

No output schema is provided, and the description does not explain what data is returned (e.g., fields of a set). For a retrieval tool, this is a significant gap. The description is incomplete for an agent to fully understand the tool's output.

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 coverage is 67% (startDate and endDate have descriptions, exerciseTemplateId does not). The description adds meaning by stating the filtering purpose for date parameters. It does not describe exerciseTemplateId beyond being required, but the overall purpose is clear.

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 action ('Get past sets'), the resource ('exercise template'), and optional filtering ('start and end dates'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get-exercise-template (which gets the template itself) and get-workout (which gets workouts).

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 implies usage when historical set data for an exercise is needed, and mentions optional date filtering. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or suggest alternatives, though the context is clear enough for a simple retrieval tool.

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