get_workout_session

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It implies a read-only lookup of an existing logged result, but does not disclose authentication requirements, whether the session must belong to the caller, error behavior for unknown IDs, or rate limits. It is adequate but leaves real behavioral gaps.

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 sentences, no filler, and the core action plus the ID requirement are front-loaded before the caveat about the missing search endpoint. Every clause carries information an agent needs.

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 one parameter, no output schema, and no nested structures, the description is complete for the task: it names the required input, how to get it, and what the response contains. 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 coverage is 100% and the single parameter is documented, so the baseline is 3. The description goes beyond the schema by explaining where the session ID originates (the numeric segment in a beyondthewhiteboard.com/workout_sessions/{id} URL) and where to obtain it programmatically (log_workout's redirectedTo field), adding genuinely useful meaning.

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 ('Get') and resource ('full details of one already-logged BTWB result'), and enumerates the returned content: workout name, date/time, movements/sets, result/score, and rank stats. It is clearly distinguishable from siblings like log_workout or delete_workout_session, which mutate or create rather than read a single session.

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 states the precondition ('you need the session ID already') and the reason ('There's no search-by-date endpoint yet'), and names concrete sources for that ID: a workout_sessions URL or log_workout's redirectedTo field. This tells the agent both when to use this tool and how to satisfy its input, which is unusually strong routing guidance.

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