hevy_create_workout

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

The description discloses the dry-run behavior and the env var requirement for actual writes, which is critical behavioral info. It also mentions that rep_range is rejected. No annotations exist, so the description fully carries the transparency burden.

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 a single paragraph of moderate length that packs substantial information. It is front-loaded with key facts, but could be slightly more structured (e.g., bullet points) for easier scanning. Still, every sentence adds value.

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 complexity of the nested parameter and no output schema, the description covers all critical aspects: required fields, exercise template resolution, set configuration, superset rules, rejection of rep_range, and dry-run mode. It references sibling tools where needed.

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%, so the description must compensate. It extensively explains the 'workout' object structure, required subfields, set types, RPE enum, superset_id constraints, and template ID formats, adding significant meaning beyond the bare schema.

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 'Create a workout (POST /v1/workouts)' and lists required fields, distinguishing it from update or other operations. It provides specific verb and resource, with additional context on exercise templates.

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 explicitly tells how to use the tool: required fields, resolving exercise_template_id via sibling tools, and notes that rep_range is rejected and dry-run is default. It gives clear context and alternatives for template lookup.

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