pl_get_week

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden. It reveals that the tool returns TSS sums and workouts by status, but it does not explain whether this is read-only, how sums are computed, how date is interpreted, or what the response shape is.

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 entire description is one dense sentence with no filler. The core concept (week range starting Monday) is front-loaded, and every phrase contributes meaning.

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 one-parameter getter, the description covers the main input and output substance. Yet with no output schema and no annotations, it leaves gaps around date format, response structure, and behavior when no workouts exist, so it is adequate but incomplete.

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%, but the description explains that the date parameter selects the containing Monday-Sunday week, adding real meaning to the bare 'date' string. However, it omits the expected date format, timezone handling, or any constraints.

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 states a specific resource: a Monday-Sunday week containing a given date, with TSS sums and filtered workouts. This is more specific than a bare name and distinguishes it from sibling get_* tools, though it never explicitly names an alternative.

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 provides no guidance on when to choose pl_get_week over pl_get_workouts, pl_get_pmc, pl_get_thresholds, or pl_status. The intended use is only implied by the name and the date-based week selection.

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