get_routine

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey behavior. It states the retrieval of a routine with exercises and sets, implying a read-only operation. However, it does not mention potential errors (e.g., missing ID), permissions, or response characteristics, leaving some 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?

The description is a single, concise sentence with no superfluous words. It is front-loaded with the key action and resource, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 low complexity (one required parameter, no output schema), the description is largely adequate. It covers the core functionality and return content. Minor omissions like error handling or authentication details are tolerable for such a simple tool.

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 sole parameter 'routineId' has no schema description (0% coverage). The tool description adds only the phrase 'by ID', which minimally clarifies it's an identifier. No format, constraints, or examples are provided, offering little value beyond the parameter name.

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'), resource ('a single routine'), and scope ('by ID with all exercises and sets'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'get_routines' (plural) and 'get_routine_folder' by specifying the single entity and included details.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_routines' for listing or 'get_workout' for workouts. The description implies usage for fetching a specific routine, but lacks exclusion criteria or when-not-to-use instructions.

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