search-exercise-templates

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses important behavioral details: the first call fetches all templates from the API, results are cached in memory, and refresh:true busts the cache. This gives the agent a clear picture of side effects and performance implications. It could mention rate limits or response format, but the caching behavior is a significant disclosure.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the purpose, followed by caching behavior and usage note. Every sentence earns its place without waste.

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 tool has moderate complexity with caching and refresh. The description covers core usage and behavior well. However, it omits details about the return value format or pagination, which would be useful given there is no output schema. Still, the description is mostly complete for a search 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 coverage is 100%, with each parameter already described in the schema. The description adds minimal extra meaning beyond the schema, primarily reinforcing the refresh behavior and the optional filter. It does not add syntax or format details beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb ('Search') with a clear resource ('exercise templates') and scope ('by name with optional muscle group filter'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get-exercise-templates, which likely lists all templates rather than searching with a filter.

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?

It clearly states the tool is for searching by name with an optional filter, and gives explicit guidance on using refresh:true to force a re-fetch. However, it does not explicitly compare to alternatives like get-exercise-templates or state when not to use this tool.

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