get_coaching_reference

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden and does disclose key traits: no arguments, no Garmin call, no athlete data read, and a once-per-conversation cadence. It could say more about caching or whether the text changes over time, but the safety and side-effect profile is clear.

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?

Purpose is front-loaded and every sentence carries information, though the itemized content list is long and slightly leans on breadth over brevity. No filler or restatement of the tool name.

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?

An output schema exists, so return-format detail is unnecessary; the description still characterizes payload content well. For a zero-param fetch tool, the invocation rules and side-effect statement make the definition 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?

Zero parameters gives a baseline of 4, and the description reinforces this with 'No arguments, no Garmin call'. There is no additional semantic depth to add beyond that.

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?

States a specific verb and resource (coaching reference / full rule set) and enumerates its contents, so the agent knows exactly what comes back. It is clearly distinguished from every sibling, which fetch athlete data, by saying it 'reads nothing of the athlete'.

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?

Gives an explicit trigger and an explicit limit: 'Call it ONCE per conversation, before the first training advice, and follow it.' That is when-to-use plus a when-not-to-repeat rule, with no inference required.

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