get_workout_by_id

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It doesn't disclose what the response contains, whether auth/scope is required, error behavior for unknown IDs, or any rate limits—only that a document is fetched.

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?

A single tight sentence with the key concept front-loaded. Appropriately sized, though it says nothing that couldn't be assumed from the name.

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?

A simple one-parameter read tool with no output schema, so the description needn't explain returns. However, it omits source of the ID and any failure modes, leaving it only marginally adequate for correct invocation.

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% for the single parameter, so the schema already documents 'document_id' as the unique document ID. The description adds no format, source, or validation detail beyond that baseline.

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 (Get) and resource (a single workout document) scoped by unique ID. The 'by_id' naming and the sibling set (get_workouts vs get_workout_by_id) make the single-vs-list distinction inferable, but the description itself doesn't articulate that contrast.

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 on when to use this versus list-style siblings like get_workouts, nor prerequisites such as needing a valid ID from a prior listing. Usage is only implied by the name.

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