smartgym_get_routine

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description goes further by disclosing the sectioned return shape, the meaning of history_depth, and the encoding convention 0.0 = bodyweight, which are genuine behavioral details beyond the annotations.

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 purpose is front-loaded in the first sentence and parameter semantics follow compactly. It is slightly dense in the final clause listing returned fields, but no sentence is wasted.

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?

With an output schema present, the description need not restate the full return structure, yet it supplies the parameter semantics and the bodyweight/history_depth conventions that the schema leaves undocumented. Nothing needed to invoke it correctly is missing.

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 must carry both parameters, and it does: `routine` is explained as a case-insensitive, partial-match name or an id, and `history_depth` is tied to how many recent sessions are returned. Both parameters get meaning the bare schema lacks.

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 ('Get a routine') and immediately scopes the output as a warmup/main/cooldown split, which distinguishes it from the sibling smartgym_list_routines. An agent can tell this is the single-routine detail tool without opening the schema.

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: it accepts a name or id and returns detail, so it is clearly the fetch-detail call. However, no explicit when-to-use versus smartgym_list_routines or the edit tools is given, and no exclusions are stated.

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