list_workout_sessions

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

Without annotations, the description must carry the transparency burden. It implies a read-only operation via 'List' and mentions optional date filtering, but discloses nothing about the return shape, sorting, pagination, or the default limit, leaving the agent to infer those details.

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?

Single sentence with no filler, front-loaded with the verb and resource. Efficient and easily parsed.

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 list operation with three optional, fully documented parameters and no output schema, the description is largely sufficient. It lacks only return-value clarity, so an agent might not know the exact shape of the workout session objects, which is a minor gap.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description mentions the date-range filtering behavior, which maps to 'from' and 'to' parameters, but it adds no semantic detail beyond the schema descriptions.

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 states a specific verb ('List'), a specific resource ('workout sessions'), and an optional filtering behavior ('by date range'), which clearly differentiates it from sibling tools like list_workout_templates or create_workout_session. The scope is immediately understandable.

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 is provided on when to choose this tool over siblings. There is no mention of alternatives, exclusions, or conditions, such as when to use list_workout_templates instead.

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