delete_workout

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

The annotation destructiveHint=true is reinforced by the description's use of 'Permanently delete' and 'irreversible.' The description also explains the idempotent behavior (if no unique match, nothing is deleted and an error is returned), which aligns with idempotentHint=true. No contradictions exist between the description and 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 description is well-structured with clear sections: the primary purpose, FIND THE SESSION, and SAVED WORKOUTS. It avoids redundancy and each sentence adds necessary information. The use of bold labels and concise bullets (though not bullets) makes it easy to parse. Despite being lengthy, it is efficiently organized and not verbose.

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?

The description fully covers the decision tree for selecting parameters: session_id vs session_date+name, defaults, the saved_workout_id alternative, and the error case (no unique match). It also states the destructive and irreversible nature, leaving no ambiguity for an agent. Given the moderate complexity (4 params, 0 required, with defaults and alternatives), the description is complete.

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?

All four parameters are fully described in the schema, and the description adds valuable context beyond the schema. For example, session_id is described as an 'Alternative to session_date + name,' session_date includes format and default, name explains substring/case-insensitivity and when it applies, and saved_workout_id clarifies its distinct purpose. The description references the FIND THE SESSION section for cross-guidance, making semantics clear.

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 and resource: 'Permanently delete a workout session and all its exercises and sets.' It also explicitly says 'Use when the user wants to remove a logged workout entirely,' providing unambiguous intent. The distinction between completed workout history and reusable saved workouts is also clarified.

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 gives explicit usage guidance: it instructs when to use the tool and how to select the correct target. It explains the two identification paths (session_id vs session_date + name), the default for session_date, and the alternative for saved_workout_id. It also states the error behavior when no unique match exists, so the agent knows when to retry or use a different parameter.

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