tp_get_libraries

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It only states 'List workout library folders' without disclosing return format, pagination, or permission requirements beyond the athlete param note about coach accounts. The read-only nature is implied by 'list' but not explicitly stated, and no other behavioral traits are revealed.

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, focused sentence that immediately conveys the tool's action and resource. There is zero wasted text, and it is appropriately minimal for a simple list operation.

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 adequately explains the core function but lacks context about what the returned data looks like or how it fits with related tools like tp_get_library_items. Given no output schema, the agent might need to infer the response structure. However, for a straightforward list operation, it is minimally sufficient.

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% for the single optional 'athlete' parameter, and the schema already explains that it targets another athlete for coach accounts. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 'List workout library folders.' uses a specific verb ('List') and a precise resource ('workout library folders'), which clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like tp_get_library_items (which lists items within a folder) and tp_get_library_item (singular). The purpose is 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?

There is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like tp_get_library_items. The athlete parameter hints at coach-account usage, but the description does not mention typical use cases or prerequisites. The purpose implies listing top-level folders, but no exclusions or alternative references are provided.

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