get-training-readiness

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It adds context that the score is based on sleep, recovery, and training load, but doesn't disclose behavior like data freshness, calculation method, or whether it's a read-only operation. The description is adequate but not rich in behavioral detail.

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 a single sentence that immediately conveys the core purpose, with no extraneous words. It is front-loaded and 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 simple query tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers the basic function. However, the lack of usage guidelines and behavioral transparency means it is not fully complete. An agent might need more context on how the score is computed or when to prefer specific sibling tools.

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 100% as the sole parameter is already described in the schema with format and default. The description adds no new semantic information beyond restating the date component. Baseline is 3.

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 verb 'Get' and the resource 'training readiness score for a date', and specifies the basis (sleep, recovery, training load). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'get-sleep' or 'get-hrv' which are individual metrics.

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 use this tool versus alternatives. For example, if an agent needs a component score like sleep separately, there is no hint that 'get-sleep' or 'get-hrv' might be more appropriate. The description lacks context on prerequisites or when not to use.

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