smartgym_get_workout_history

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 adds non-obvious behavioral detail beyond the annotations: sort order, the default/override date logic, local-timezone inclusivity, and the pagination envelope fields.

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?

Front-loads what the tool returns, then the date-window rules, then the filter and pagination. Three tight sentences with no filler; every clause carries operational meaning.

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 read-only list tool with 6 optional params, no required inputs, and an existing output schema, the description covers the windowing defaults, override semantics, filter, and pagination shape. Nothing an agent needs 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 coverage is 0%, so the description carries the full burden and mostly does: it gives the enum values for `days`, the YYYY-MM-DD inclusive local-time semantics for `date_from`/`date_to` with their override relationship, and the `routine` filter accepting name or id. Only `limit` and `offset` are left undocumented, though pagination is acknowledged via total/has_more/next_offset.

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+resource ('List past workouts') and adds scope (newest first) plus the returned fields (duration, calories, heart rate). No sibling tool covers workout history, so it is unambiguous among the given set.

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?

Explains the default window (last 7 days), how to change it via `days` (14/30), and that explicit `date_from`/`date_to` override the default — clear context for choosing inputs. It does not name alternatives or exclusions, but none of the sibling tools are plausible substitutes.

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