list_workouts

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

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint=true, but the description adds real behavior: ordering ('newest first'), the compact-row payload (id, name, duration, TSS, difficulty, tags, step count), and the deliberate exclusion of Steps. What it omits is pagination behavior beyond the offset hint, which is a minor gap.

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?

One sentence plus a short routing clause, both front-loaded and waste-free. Every phrase (scope, ordering, return shape, sibling pointer) carries information.

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?

There's no output schema, yet the description enumerates the row fields an agent will receive and flags that Steps are excluded, which is exactly the missing context. With only two optional params of documented semantics, nothing needed to call it correctly is absent.

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%, so baseline is 3, but the description earns credit by clarifying that 'newest first' ordering is what offset counts against ('How many of the newest Workouts to skip' is reinforced in prose). That ordering semantics is the one piece of meaning the schema alone doesn't convey.

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 and resource ('List the rider's own Workouts in their Rouvy library') and immediately disambiguates with '(the plans, not the rides)', which cleanly separates it from list_activities. An agent can pick this tool over its siblings without opening the schema.

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?

Explicitly routes the agent to get_workout for the Steps, which is the one obvious follow-up action. It doesn't spell out when to prefer list_activities over this tool beyond the 'plans, not rides' aside, so it stops just short of full when/when-not guidance.

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