hevy_get_routine_folder

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It does not mention failure modes (e.g., folder not found), authentication requirements, or any side effects. It only states what the tool does, not its behavior.

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 sentence containing exactly the necessary information. No wasted words, and it is front-loaded with the action and object.

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 tool's simplicity (1 param, no nested objects, no output schema), the description is adequate but minimal. It does not explain the return value or error cases, which would be helpful for a complete understanding.

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?

The schema has 0% coverage, meaning no parameter descriptions. The description partially compensates by stating 'by its positive integer id', but it merely restates the schema constraints without adding new meaning. The required folderId parameter's purpose is clear, but no further semantics.

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 verb (Fetch) and the resource (routine folder) with the specific identifier type (positive integer id). It distinguishes from sibling tools like hevy_list_routine_folders by specifying 'one' and providing the lookup method.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like hevy_list_routine_folders or hevy_get_routine. The agent is left to infer that this is for fetching a single folder by ID, but there is no mention of when this is appropriate.

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