get_single_workout

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of disclosing safety. The verb 'Get' implies a read-only operation, and 'complete details' indicates the return scope. However, it does not mention error behavior (e.g., invalid ID) or that the operation has no side effects, leaving some ambiguity.

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, well-formed sentence that immediately conveys the action and resource. It is front-loaded and has no superfluous words, making it highly efficient for an agent to parse.

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 get operation, the description is minimally adequate: it identifies the resource and parameter. However, it lacks context about the return structure, error cases, or relationship to sibling listing tools, and the absence of annotations and output schema increases the need for richer context.

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?

The schema has one parameter with 0% description coverage. The description merely names 'workoutId' without adding contextual meaning, such as its origin (e.g., from get_workouts) or format expectations. It offers minimal compensation, only implying it is the lookup key.

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 specific resource 'single workout's complete details' with a unique identifier. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_workouts (which lists) and get_single_routine (different resource).

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?

The usage context is implied by the word 'single' versus the sibling get_workouts, but the description does not explicitly state when to choose this tool over alternatives or mention any exclusions. There is no guidance on prerequisites like where to obtain the workoutId.

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