get_workouts

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It describes the return format (list + summary) and parameter options. However, it does not explicitly state that this is a read-only operation, mention authentication needs, rate limits, or pagination behavior. The description is adequate but missing these behavioral hints.

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 three sentences long, front-loaded with the key fields and purpose. Every sentence adds value: first sentence lists what is returned, second explains the parameter options, third gives a usage directive. No wasted words.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (3 optional parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is mostly complete. It covers the purpose, parameter semantics, and usage context. However, it does not mention behavior when no workouts are found, whether results are sorted, or any error conditions. Still, it is fairly thorough for a list tool.

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%, so the schema already documents the three parameters well. The description restates the two ways to specify time range (days or start/end) but does not add significant new meaning beyond what the schema provides. It adds value by mentioning the return structure (summary + records), but that is not parameter-specific.

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 tool retrieves a list of logged WHOOP workouts with specific fields (sport type, duration, strain, heart rates, calories). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_recovery or get_sleep by focusing on exercise sessions, and explicitly mentions both current and historical queries.

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 explicitly says 'Use this to answer questions about specific exercise sessions, now or in the past.' It also explains the two date range options (days or start/end). While no explicit 'when not to use' or alternatives are given, the sibling tools are distinct enough that this guidance is sufficient for an agent.

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