tp_analyze_workout

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does disclose a key side effect: saving the full time-series to a JSON file. However, it lacks details such as whether the file is overwritten, where it is saved, or any permissions/rate limits, leaving uncertainty about the tool's behavior.

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 two short sentences, front-loaded with the primary purpose and a key side effect. Every word earns its place, with no wasted text.

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?

The description gives a brief overview of the tool's functionality and notes the JSON file side effect, but it lacks important context such as return value, file handling details, and differentiation from sibling tools. For a tool with a side effect and multiple related tools, more completeness is needed.

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 description coverage is 50%, with only the 'athlete' parameter having a description. The tool description does not mention either parameter and provides no additional meaning for 'workout_id', the only required parameter, which remains undocumented. This fails to compensate for the low schema coverage.

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 retrieves workout analysis including metrics, zones, and laps, and mentions saving full time-series to a JSON file. It has a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('workout analysis'), but does not explicitly differentiate it from sibling tools like get_workout or get_workout_prs.

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?

Usage context is implied through the mention of metrics, zones, laps, and saving to a JSON file, but there are no explicit when-to-use or alternative comparisons. The description does not state when to prefer this over similar tools like download_workout_file or get_workout.

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