hevy_get_workout

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It confirms the tool is a read operation returning full record details, but does not mention error behavior (e.g., what happens if UUID is invalid), idempotency, or any side effects. It is adequate for a simple fetch but could be more transparent.

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 consists of two short, well-structured sentences. Every word adds value, with the core action and return information front-loaded. No redundancy or verbosity.

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 fetch tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description is largely complete. It addresses the return content (full record, exercises, sets) and assumes standard behavior. Minor gaps include lack of error handling details and idempotency, but overall it is sufficient for such a straightforward operation.

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%, yet the description adds no new meaning beyond what the schema already provides (that 'workoutId' is a UUID). It fails to compensate for the lack of parameter documentation, merely restating the parameter's type.

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 action ('Fetch'), resource ('one workout'), identifier ('by UUID'), and the scope of return data ('full record including exercises and sets'). It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like hevy_list_workouts or hevy_get_workout_events.

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 implies when to use (having a UUID and needing full workout details) but does not explicitly state when not to use or provide direct comparisons to alternatives. Usage context is implied rather than explicitly guided.

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