get_training_readiness

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It does not disclose any behavioral traits such as side effects, required permissions, or the nature of the score (e.g., read-only operation). The description is minimal and lacks transparency beyond the surface-level purpose.

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?

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence of 9 words. It is concise and immediately communicates the tool's purpose. However, it could benefit from additional context without sacrificing brevity.

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 simple get operation with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description provides a basic understanding. However, it lacks details about the return value (e.g., score range, units) and how the date parameter affects the result. It is minimally complete but not fully informative.

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?

The input schema has one parameter with full description and pattern. The tool description does not add any additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides. Since schema coverage is 100%, the baseline of 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 clearly states the verb 'Get' and the resource 'training readiness score', and explains its purpose ('how prepared your body is for training'). It distinguishes itself from many 'get_*' siblings by specifying the readiness metric.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention any prerequisites, conditions, or exclusions. Given the large number of sibling tools, this lack of context makes it harder for an agent to decide when to invoke it.

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