tp_get_workout_comments

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. The description only says 'Get comments on a workout' and does not mention authentication needs, response format, pagination, or the distinction between athlete and coach access, leaving important operational details undisclosed.

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 with no redundancy or filler. It is concise and front-loaded, with every word earning its place.

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?

For a tool with no annotations, no output schema, and moderate parameter coverage, this description is minimal and incomplete. It does not mention the optional 'athlete' parameter for coach accounts, when to use it, or any behavioral constraints, making it inadequate for reliable tool selection in a broader operational context.

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 descriptions cover only 50% of parameters, and the tool description adds no parameter information. It does not explain the purpose of 'workout_id' or clarify the optional 'athlete' parameter beyond what the schema already provides, failing to compensate for the missing schema documentation.

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 comments for a workout, using a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('comments on a workout'). It distinguishes from siblings like 'tp_add_workout_comment' and 'tp_get_workout_note', though it could be more explicit about the scope.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'tp_get_workout_note' or 'tp_get_note_comments'. The description lacks any context about selection criteria, exclusions, or prerequisites like coach/athlete considerations.

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