List recent workouts

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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry the full burden. It mentions that the tool returns a 'cached workout ID response', indicating caching behavior. However, it does not disclose other behavioral traits like authentication needs, rate limits, or the exact format of the response.

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 extremely concise, consisting of two short sentences that convey the core purpose and a key behavioral detail (cached response). No unnecessary words or redundancy.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (5 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is insufficient. It omits crucial information about pagination, sorting, and searching functionality. A complete description should explain how page/take work, the meaning of order and sortBy, and the role of query.

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 5 parameters (page, take, order, query, sortBy) with 0% schema description coverage. The description adds no explanation for any parameter, leaving their meaning and usage entirely to the agent to infer. This is a critical gap given the schema lacks descriptions.

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 'list/search' and the resource 'user's logged workouts', making the tool's purpose immediately evident. It also distinguishes itself from sibling tools like ryot_get_workout_details and ryot_log_workout by focusing on listing and searching past workouts.

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 implies the tool is for listing or searching workouts, but it does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., when to use ryot_workout_discovery or ryot_get_workout_details). No when-not or context-specific advice is given.

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