list_workout_folders

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

The description is brief but does not contradict the readOnlyHint annotation. It adds limited behavioral context beyond the annotation, such as the default athlete ID, but does not describe return format or edge cases. With the output schema available and the readOnlyHint, the bar is lowered; the description provides acceptable baseline transparency.

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 concise, with three short sentences that provide purpose, usage context, and a parameter note. Every sentence adds value, and the structure is easy 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 read-only tool with one parameter, an output schema, and clear sibling differentiation, the description is complete. It covers purpose, usage guidance, and parameter default, leaving no critical gaps.

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% with a single parameter including a default value and description. The description merely restates the athlete_id default, adding no additional meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema already documents the parameter.

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 tool lists workout folders in the athlete library, using a specific verb and resource. It also distinguishes itself from the sibling tool list_workouts by explicitly noting that list_workouts is for listing workouts within a folder.

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?

Explicit guidance is provided: 'Use when browsing workout library structure' and 'To list workouts within a folder, use list_workouts.' This names the alternative tool and gives clear context for when to use this one.

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