tp_get_workout_note

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It indicates a read operation ('Get') and the 'private' nature of the note, but does not disclose authentication requirements, behavior when no note exists, or any limitations beyond what the schema hints at.

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 single sentence is brief and front-loaded, but it is under-specified for a tool with two parameters and no output schema. Conciseness is present, but it sacrifices necessary context, making it minimally acceptable.

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 lack of annotations, no output schema, and the existence of similar siblings (tp_get_note, tp_get_workout), the description is incomplete. It does not explain what a 'workout note' is, how it differs from comments or general notes, or what the response looks like.

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% (athlete is well described, workout_id is not). The description adds no parameter-specific meaning, failing to clarify the required workout_id or note format. It does not compensate for the half of the schema lacking descriptions.

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' with a specific resource 'private workout note' and scope 'for a workout.' This distinguishes it from sibling tools like tp_set_workout_note and tp_get_workout_comments.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as tp_get_workout or tp_get_note. It does not mention exclusions or the optional athlete parameter for coach accounts, leaving usage context entirely implied.

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