smartgym_add_exercise

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

Adds material behavior beyond the annotations: dry_run defaults to true and 'sends NOTHING', and omitting sets silently produces one flagged 1x10 set. Those are exactly the side effects an agent must know, though 'flagged' is undefined and nothing is said about error/permission behavior.

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?

Three short lines, front-loaded with the core action, then the two operational facts (position indexing and the dry_run default). No filler; the only weak spot is the unexplained word 'flagged'.

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 an 8-parameter destructive mutation with 0% schema coverage, the description covers the highest-risk items (dry_run, defaults) but leaves required-but-undefined parameters and the meaning of 'flagged' unexplained. An output schema exists, so return values need not be described.

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 0%, so the description carries the burden and only partially meets it: it explains position counting, the section values, and defaults for sets/rest/note, but says nothing about reps, weight_kg, routine, or exercise, and 'optional rest' has no unit or range.

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: 'Add a catalog exercise to a routine section', and names the section enum values inline. It is separable from siblings like remove_exercise or update_exercise by the verb, but never explicitly contrasts itself with them.

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?

Usage is implied rather than stated: the section/position semantics and the dry_run safety default tell the agent how to invoke it, but there is no when-to-use vs when-to-use-an-alternative guidance (e.g. update_exercise for modifying an existing entry).

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