get_workout_series

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.