Icu Create Workout Folder

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the mutation/idempotency profile is carried structurally. The description adds genuinely non-schema context: the output id is meant to be reused as folder_id, and the created object is not a calendar entity. It stops short of noting side effects such as duplicate names or athlete scoping consequences for coaches.

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?

Two short sentences, the object distinction is front-loaded, and the second sentence carries the actionable chaining information. 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-value explanation is unnecessary, and the description still flags the one thing an agent must do with the result (reuse the id as folder_id). Combined with full parameter documentation and annotations, nothing needed to invoke this correctly is missing.

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% and folder_type already spells out FOLDER vs PLAN in detail, including the icu_apply_training_plan link. The description repeats the folder/plan distinction in passing but adds no syntax or defaulting detail beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 ('Create a new LIBRARY folder or training PLAN to hold workouts') and explicitly excludes a plausible misread with '— not a calendar item', which separates it from icu_create_event. An agent can distinguish it from icu_create_workout and icu_create_event without opening any schema.

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?

Names the exact downstream consumers ('Pass the returned id as folder_id to icu_create_workout or icu_bulk_create_workouts') and the browse alternative ('use icu_get_workout_library'). This covers both when to use it and what to use instead for the adjacent read case.

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