update_workout

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states that the tool updates a workout, but does not explain whether it performs a full replacement or partial merge, whether changes are irreversible, what permissions are required, or the response format. The minimal disclosure leaves the agent uncertain about side effects.

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 short and to the point, with no redundant or superfluous information. It effectively communicates the core purpose in one sentence. It could be slightly improved by adding more detail 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 mutation tool with 4 parameters and no output schema, the description lacks important context such as the result format, error handling, or any irreversible consequences. It does not adequately compensate for the missing annotations and output schema.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema by mapping 'structure' to the 'workoutSegments' parameter. However, it does not clarify parameter details (e.g., format or constraints) that are not already in 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?

The description clearly states the action ('Update'), the resource ('an existing workout'), and explicitly lists the updatable fields ('name, description, or structure'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_workout, delete_workout, and get_workout_by_id.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., create_workout for new workouts, or other update-like tools). There is no mention of prerequisites (e.g., that the workout must exist), nor any condition where this tool is inappropriate.

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