create_strength_workout

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

Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses experimental status, advises confirming the result in the Garmin Connect app, and suggests delete_workout for rollback. While it doesn't detail permissions or side effects beyond creation, the experimental warning and safety net provide meaningful behavioral 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 efficiently structured: a one-line purpose, a concise experimental warning with actionable advice, and a well-formatted argument list. Every sentence adds value, and the example is directly useful without being verbose.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (3 params, no output schema, no annotations), the description covers purpose, usage, parameters, and risk mitigation. It doesn't explain return values, but that's not critical for creation tools. The description is largely complete for an agent to invoke it safely.

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 0%, so the description fully compensates. It explains name (display location), exercises (with a detailed JSON example including optional category), and schedule_date (format and purpose). This goes far beyond the bare schema, giving the agent everything needed to construct valid arguments.

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 ('Create') and resource ('strength workout in Garmin Connect'), and mentions optional scheduling. This distinguishes it from siblings like list_workouts and delete_workout, making the purpose unambiguous.

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?

It provides usage context with the experimental warning and advises verifying in the app. It explicitly references delete_workout as an undo alternative, but does not fully contrast with schedule_workout or list_workouts. Still, the context is clear enough for an agent to decide when to use it.

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