icu_delete_workout_folder

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

Goes well beyond the annotations (destructiveHint, idempotentHint already declare the safety profile). The description adds genuinely new behavior: the `safe` delete mode default refuses folders still holding workouts and reports them in the `skipped` envelope, and calendar events already applied from a plan survive the deletion.

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?

Front-loaded with the destructive action, then side effects and alternatives in order of importance. Slightly long for two parameters, but every sentence carries behavioral or routing 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 destructive tool with an output schema covering the `skipped` envelope, the description still supplies the missing behavioral context: irreversibility, safe-mode default, and calendar-event persistence. Nothing needed to call it correctly is absent.

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%, so folder_id (with its icu_get_workout_library provenance) and athlete_id are already documented. The description adds no parameter-level syntax or constraints, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 with explicit scope: 'Permanently delete ONE library folder or training plan AND every workout in it.' The capitalized ONE and the cascade description distinguish it from icu_delete_workout and icu_delete_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?

Explicitly routes to alternatives with conditions: use icu_delete_workout for a single library workout, icu_delete_event for calendar events left behind by a deleted plan. It also gives the pre-call condition ('Confirm with the user before calling if unsure'), leaving nothing to inference.

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