hevy_get_workout_events

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

Despite no annotations, the description fully discloses behavior: event structure (updated/deleted), pagination limits (pageSize 1-10 with HTTP 400 for >10), and the importance of since for detecting deletions. No contradictions.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with purpose, every sentence adds value. No redundancy or fluff. Highly efficient.

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 tool with 3 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is self-contained. It explains the return format, usage pattern, and error condition. No missing information.

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 100% with descriptions for all 3 parameters. The description adds functional context (e.g., how to use since for sync, pageSize limit enforcement) beyond the schema, though schema already covers basic meaning. Baseline 3 with upgrade due to added usage context.

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 is a 'Delta sync feed' for workouts, returning events newer than a timestamp. It distinguishes from sibling tools like hevy_list_workouts by emphasizing deletion detection, making the purpose unambiguous.

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?

Explicit instructions are given for incremental sync: first call with since=1970-01-01T00:00:00Z, subsequent calls with the newest seen timestamp. It also notes that this is the only way to detect deletions, guiding the agent to use this tool for that purpose.

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