list_routines

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds nothing about pagination behavior or result shape; the pagination params (page, page_size) exist in the schema but the description doesn't disclose default or limit behavior.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the primary action. No filler.

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 list operation with pagination and eight siblings, the description omits when to use it, how results are paginated, and how it differs from get_routine. An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, but the guidance gaps remain significant.

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% and the two pagination parameters are only documented by their names and defaults. The description mentions neither parameter, so it neither compensates nor adds value 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 the verb and resource ('List routines'), which is clear enough, but it does not differentiate from get_routine, list_workouts, or other siblings beyond the noun. No scope qualifiers (all routines? user's routines?) are given.

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 second sentence ('Use get_routine before proposing an update') gives a usage hint, but it describes a workflow for update_routine rather than when to use list_routines versus get_routine or list_workouts. Implied usage only.

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