add_run

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the structure of the run step (end condition, target) and parameter constraints. However, it does not mention side effects, permissions, or prerequisites (e.g., whether a workout must exist). It adds value but is not exhaustive.

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: a few sentences followed by bullet-pointed parameter details. It is well-structured, starting with the main purpose, then constraints, then parameter explanations. No unnecessary information.

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 complexity (8 parameters, many optional with constraints) and the presence of an output schema, the description covers essential aspects like parameter relationships. It lacks explicit context about where the step is added (e.g., to a workout), but sibling tool names imply it is part of a workout-building workflow.

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 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It does so thoroughly, explaining each parameter's format (e.g., duration as 'M:SS' or 'lap', distance like '1km') and constraints (e.g., pace_min must pair with pace_max). This adds significant meaning beyond the schema.

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 'Add a running interval step' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like add_bike, add_circuit, etc., and provides details on end condition and target options.

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 description gives explicit constraints: set exactly one of duration, distance, or neither; and set one of zone, pace range, HR range, or none. It also specifies required pairing for pace and HR parameters. However, it lacks explicit comparison to alternative tools or when not to use.

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