Icu Get Upcoming Workouts

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real behavioral context beyond that: the result set is silently filtered to workouts only, and hide_from_athlete / athlete_cannot_edit are conditionally present and changed via icu_bulk_update_event_access. It stops short of describing ordering or the default 7-day window semantics, which an agent might want.

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-loads the core distinction (calendar events, not library templates) in the first clause, then layers usage, id routing, alternatives, and field caveats in short, scannable sentences. No sentence is redundant with the schema or annotations.

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?

With an output schema available and annotations covering safety, the description's remaining duty is routing and identity of the returned objects — the id provenance warning and the conditional fields are exactly the details an agent would otherwise get wrong. Nothing materially needed to call it 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%, with both limit and athlete_id documented in the schema, so the baseline is 3. The description adds nothing about either parameter — no clarification of the time window that 'upcoming' implies or how athlete_id behaves for coaches — so it neither compensates nor regresses.

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 (fetch planned workout entries on the upcoming calendar) and immediately disambiguates from two classes of confusable siblings: calendar events vs. workout-library templates. An agent can distinguish it from icu_get_calendar_events and icu_get_workouts_in_folder 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?

Gives explicit trigger phrases ("what's my next workout?"), explicit exclusions (filters out notes, races, goals), and names the correct alternatives for every other case: icu_get_calendar_events for all entry types, icu_get_workouts_in_folder for library templates. It also states which downstream tools the returned id is valid for and which it is not.

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