icu_get_upcoming_workouts

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint/idempotentHint/non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely non-structured context: returned IDs are calendar event IDs that must not be passed to the icu_*_workout library tools, notes/races/goals are excluded, and hide_from_athlete/athlete_cannot_edit appear only when set with a pointer to icu_bulk_update_event_access for mutation.

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 core calendar-vs-library distinction is front-loaded in the opening sentence and each subsequent clause routes to a specific sibling, so little text is wasted. It is slightly dense with sibling references, but most sentences earn their place.

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 present, the description need not describe return values, and it correctly focuses on identity, filtering, and routing. Combined with full schema coverage and rich annotations, an agent has everything needed to invoke it correctly.

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 limit and athlete_id are already documented in the schema; the description adds no additional parameter syntax, defaults, or semantics. This is the expected baseline when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 (Fetch), resource (planned WORKOUT entries on the upcoming CALENDAR) and scope, explicitly noting what is filtered out (notes, races, goals). It immediately distinguishes itself from library-template tools by declaring these are calendar EVENTS, not templates, so an agent can differentiate without opening a sibling 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 alternatives and the condition that selects each: icu_get_calendar_events for every calendar entry type, icu_get_workouts_in_folder for reusable templates, and the icu_get_event/update/delete family for acting on returned IDs. It also paraphrases natural-language triggers ('what's my next workout?').

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