Entrenamientos

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the burden of behavioral disclosure. It lists output fields and ordering, but does not specify read-only nature, error handling, authentication requirements, rate limits, or response format. This is moderate transparency.

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 a single, efficient sentence covering key output fields and ordering. It is front-loaded and contains no unnecessary words. However, it could benefit from structural separation of output fields and parameters.

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 4 parameters and 100% schema coverage but no output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks information on pagination (how nextToken works, whether start/end are required), rate limits, or details about empty results. The tool's complexity warrants more context.

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 100%, so each parameter is already described in the input schema. The description adds no additional semantics beyond implying a date range via context; it does not elaborate on pagination tokens or parameter specifics. Baseline score of 3 applies.

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 it lists user workouts with specific fields (sport, strain, calories, heart rate, distance, heart rate zones) and orders them by most recent. This effectively distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_workout_by_id (single workout) and others for body measurements, cycles, etc.

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 implies usage for listing workouts with no explicit guidance on when to use versus alternatives. It lacks exclusions or scenarios for not using this tool, such as when needing a single workout or filtering by other criteria. The pagination mechanism is not mentioned.

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