tp_validate_structure

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the key behavioral trait (no creation) and the returned outputs (block count, duration, estimated IF/TSS), which are essential for safe usage.

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 concise, front-loaded sentences. The first states the action and scope, the second the return values. Every word earns its place with no redundancy.

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 simple one-parameter validation tool with no output schema, the description explains what it does, what it returns, and the parameter format. This is sufficient for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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 already fully describes the single parameter with 100% coverage, establishing a baseline of 3. The description adds value by cross-referencing the structure format to tp_create_workout, clarifying that it uses the same JSON format.

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 identifies the tool as validating workout interval structure, explicitly stating it does not create a workout. This differentiates it from tp_create_workout and specifies the resource and action precisely.

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 phrase 'without creating a workout' implies use for validation prior to creation, effectively contrasting with tp_create_workout. It gives clear context though it does not explicitly name alternatives or provide exclusion scenarios.

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