get_routine

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, covering the safety profile. The description only adds that lookup requires an exact ID and omits auth, error, rate-limit, or return behavior, though an output schema exists.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. The size is appropriate for a simple lookup tool.

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?

With an output schema present and annotations covering read-only/open-world behavior, the description supplies the essential invocation context: get one routine by exact ID. It could mention invalid-ID behavior or where to obtain the ID, but those are minor for this simple 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 0% for the single required parameter routine_id. The description partially compensates by identifying it as an exact Hevy routine ID, but gives no format, example, or source information, so meaning is added only in part.

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 verb ('Get'), resource ('routine'), and scope ('one') with the lookup key ('exact Hevy routine ID'). This distinguishes it from siblings like list_routines (plural) and create_routine/update_routine.

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 'by exact Hevy routine ID' implies the tool is for when an exact ID is already known, but it does not name alternatives or state when not to use it. Usage is left to inference from the phrasing.

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