Server Quality Checklist

Tool Scores

• get_workoutA
  3.6/5.0
  Behavior4/5

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

  The description adds pagination behavior ('Split output is paginated') and mentions data availability, which are not captured by the annotations (readOnly, idempotent, etc.). It does not contradict any annotation.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  Two concise sentences with the main purpose front-loaded. No filler or redundancy; every word adds value.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness3/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  For a read-only tool with no output schema, the description gives a reasonable overview but omits details on response structure and how pagination parameters control output. It is adequate but leaves gaps for an agent to fully understand invocation.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters2/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema description coverage is only 33% (only workout_name is documented). The description mentions pagination but does not explain split_limit or split_offset, leaving these parameters unclear. It fails to compensate for the low schema coverage.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states the tool's action ('Read one workout summary') and specifies the returned elements: recorded activity type, available splits, and data availability. It distinguishes itself from list_workouts (which lists) by focusing on a single workout, and from get_workout_series by its singular nature.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines2/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  No guidance on when to use this tool versus its siblings. It does not mention list_workouts or get_workout_series, nor does it provide conditions or exclusions. The agent must infer usage from the name and context.

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

• list_workoutsA
  3.8/5.0
  Behavior4/5

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

  The description transparently discloses the read-only behavior (consistent with readOnlyHint), includes pagination behavior, and states the filtering default. It does not contradict the annotations and adds useful behavioral context not already covered by readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, or openWorldHint.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is two sentences, with the main action front-loaded. Every sentence adds meaningful information (listing scope, filtering behavior, pagination, ordering). There is no redundant or vague wording.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness3/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Given the tool has 5 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the core purpose and pagination but does not explain how to page through results (page_token) or the maximum page size. It omits potential edge cases like empty dates or timezone handling, but is adequate for a basic list operation.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters2/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema descriptions exist for start_date, end_date, and activity_types, but page_size and page_token lack any explanation. The tool description only says 'Paginated' without clarifying how page_token works or the meaning of page_size, leaving two parameters semantically under-specified relative to the 60% schema coverage.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states the primary action ('List recorded workouts') and specifies the scope with 'by local date range' and 'Includes all activity types unless explicitly filtered'. The mention of pagination and ordering ('newest first') adds clarity without ambiguity.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines3/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  The description implies when to use this tool (for broad listing by date range) and mentions filtering behavior, but it does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools like get_workout or get_workout_series. The guidance is implicit rather than explicit.

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

• get_workout_seriesA
  4/5.0
  Behavior4/5

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

  Annotations already cover readOnly, idempotent, openWorld, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds genuinely useful behavioral context beyond that: per-series pagination, the GPS/include_gps requirement, and 'No files are saved.' It does not exhaustively cover edge cases, but it adds non-obvious facts without contradicting annotations.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  Three concise sentences, front-loaded with the core read operation and followed by the most important behavioral details. There is no filler, no repetition of schema descriptions, and every sentence earns its place.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness3/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  The description plus schema is adequate for a default call, but with no output schema, a nested page_tokens object, and several defaulted parameters, an agent still lacks clarity on how pagination tokens are supplied and what the returned structure looks like. It is workable but has clear gaps for a 7-parameter tool.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters2/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema description coverage is only 43%, leaving include_tcx, page_tokens, measurements, and max_points_per_series without schema descriptions. The description adds only 'Optional TCX; GPS requires include_gps=true' and 'per-series pagination,' which does not adequately compensate for the missing semantics of pagination tokens, measurement selection, or series size bounds.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description opens with a specific verb ('Read') and a clear resource ('bounded detailed measurements in a workout time window'). 'Per-series pagination' and optional TCX distinguish it from the sibling tools get_workout and list_workouts, which are single-workout and listing operations.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines4/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  The description clearly implies when to use the tool: when detailed measurements in a workout time window are needed, optionally with TCX. It gives concrete context but does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, so it stops short of full routing guidance.

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