get-routines

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only mentions pagination and inclusion of custom/default routines. It omits details like sorting order, whether deleted routines are included, error handling, or response structure. This lack of behavioral transparency could mislead the agent about what to expect.

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?

Two sentences efficiently convey purpose and usage context. The first sentence defines the action and scope; the second suggests use cases. No redundant information, and the key details are front-loaded.

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 simple paginated list with two integer parameters and no output schema, the description provides minimal viability. It covers the basic purpose and pagination but lacks details about response fields, error conditions, and ordering. Given the absence of annotations and output schema, more context would improve completeness.

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 0% (no parameter descriptions), so the description should compensate. While 'paginated list' implies page and pageSize parameters, the description does not explain their meaning, valid ranges, or defaults. The schema provides min/max/defaults, but the description adds no value beyond the tool's name.

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 retrieves a paginated list of workout routines, including custom and default. It specifies the verb 'Get' and resource 'routines', and distinguishes it from sibling tools like get-routine (singular) and search-exercise-templates. The inclusion of 'paginated' and 'browsing or searching' clarifies its purpose.

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 mentions it is 'useful for browsing or searching your available routines,' which implies suitable usage scenarios. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it (e.g., for a single routine, use get-routine) or provide alternatives, leaving the agent to infer from sibling names.

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