get_upcoming_workouts

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that it returns only workout events and that it outputs a JSON string, but it does not explicitly state that it is read-only or describe error behavior, rate limits, or authorization needs. This is acceptable but not comprehensive.

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 concise and well-structured, using a clear first sentence for purpose, a second for filtering detail, and a standard Args/Returns format. Every sentence earns its place with no redundant information.

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 single-parameter read-only tool, the description covers the essential aspects: what it retrieves, what it filters out, and the parameter. Some ambiguity remains about the exact definition of 'upcoming days' (e.g., start time, timezone), but given the low complexity, the description is adequately complete.

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 input schema already documents the 'limit' parameter with 100% coverage, including its default value. The description merely repeats this information without adding any extra semantic detail, so it provides no value beyond what the schema already offers.

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 tool retrieves upcoming planned workouts from the calendar and explicitly differentiates itself by filtering out notes, races, and goals, making it distinct from sibling calendar tools like get_calendar_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 explains that it is useful for seeing planned training ahead, providing clear usage context. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives such as get_calendar_events for non-workout events, so the exclusion of other calendar events is implied rather than explicitly stated.

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