Set the athlete name

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden and does well: it discloses that the change applies to past cards too, and warns against guessing. It could add more about overwriting behavior or lack of reversibility, but the core behavioral implications are covered.

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?

Three sentences, each earning its place: the main effect, the athlete/gear distinction, and a necessary user-interaction safeguard. Information is front-loaded and there is no fluff.

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 setter, the description covers what is set, the scope of the change, and how to obtain the value. It does not describe the return value or error behavior, but that is a minor gap for this mutating tool with no output schema.

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 documents the single parameter including format and max length, so the baseline is 3. The description adds useful context about the name being shown on cards, but does not add new parameter-level meaning beyond the schema.

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?

States a specific action ('Set') on a specific resource (the athlete name shown on every card), and clarifies that the athlete is the account owner, not the model/gear. This distinguishes it clearly from siblings like get_profile and list_activities.

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?

Gives explicit usage guidance: always ask the user for the name and never guess from email or filesystem. It does not explicitly name alternatives, but the guidance is clear enough for an agent to know when and how to invoke this tool.

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