Unschedule Workout

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, so the description adds value by explaining the nuance: it frees a date while keeping the workout intact, implying the workout record is not deleted. This goes beyond the annotation without contradicting it.

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 crisp sentences with zero filler. The core action is front-loaded, and the usage guidance and differentiation come right after. Every sentence earns its place.

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 single-parameter, no-output-schema tool, the description covers all that an agent needs: what it does, how to get the ID, when to use it instead of delete_workout, and the behavioral effect. The destructiveHint annotation fills in the safety profile, making the description complete.

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% (single parameter fully explained). The description reinforces the source of the ID (schedule_workout or get_scheduled_workouts) but does not add new meaning beyond the schema description. 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 ('Remove') and a clear resource ('a scheduled workout from the calendar'), and directly differentiates from the sibling tool delete_workout by noting the latter unschedules on its own. This leaves no ambiguity about what the tool does.

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 explicitly states how to obtain the needed ID (via get_scheduled_workouts) and gives a when-not condition: 'delete_workout unschedules on its own, so this is only needed to free a date while keeping the workout.' This clearly routes the agent between the two related tools.

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