get-workouts

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true (safe read). The description adds context about pagination behavior and ordering (newest first), which goes beyond annotations and helps the agent understand the tool's behavior. However, it does not mention potential edge cases like empty lists or error handling.

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, front-loaded with the main purpose. No wasted words, but could be slightly more concise by merging the second and third parts. Overall well-structured.

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 presence of an output schema (which describes return values), the description provides sufficient context about what the workout details include (title, description, times, exercises). It does not mention pagination metadata, but the output schema likely covers that. Missing any mention of scope (e.g., all user's workouts) is a minor gap.

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% (no parameter descriptions in schema). The description only says 'paginated list', implying page and pageSize parameters, but does not explain their constraints (e.g., page is a positive integer, pageSize max 10). The agent must infer from schema defaults and constraints, which is insufficient for a 0% coverage.

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 it returns a paginated list of workouts with ordering from newest to oldest. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'get-workout' (single workout) and 'get-workout-count' (count only). The verb 'Get' and resource 'list of workouts' are specific and clear.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., get-workout for a single workout, get-workout-count for counts). The context is implied by tool names, but the description does not explicitly state usage boundaries.

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