tp_get_workout_prs

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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It fails to mention read-only nature, auth requirements, what constitutes a PR, or the response format, leaving key behaviors 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, front-loaded sentence with no redundant words. It is concise and easy to read, though its brevity sacrifices important context that would be beneficial.

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 no annotations, no output schema, and an undocumented required parameter, the description is insufficient for an agent to fully understand the tool's capabilities and invocation requirements. The concept of 'PRs' is left open to interpretation.

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 schema describes the athlete parameter but not workout_id. The tool description says 'during a specific workout,' which weakly hints at workout_id's role, but it doesn't clarify how to supply or interpret either parameter. With only 50% schema coverage, the description should compensate but does not.

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 uses a specific verb 'Get' and names the resource 'PRs' scoped to 'a specific workout,' which clearly states the core function. However, it does not differentiate this tool from sibling tp_get_peaks, which could be similar in nature.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any prerequisites or exclusions. It simply states what it does without context on the appropriate use case.

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