Exercise Details

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds value by enumerating the specific data fields returned, but does not disclose potential rate limits or authentication requirements beyond what annotations provide.

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?

Two sentences: the first defines the core purpose, the second provides usage context. No redundant or extraneous information.

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 has only one parameter, an output schema exists, and annotations cover safety, the description is complete. It explains what the tool returns and how it fits into a workflow (with exercise_search).

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?

The input schema already provides a clear description of the 'id' parameter (exercise base ID from search results, with example). With 100% schema coverage, the description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get full exercise details by ID') and clearly lists the data fields returned (description, muscles, equipment, category). It also distinguishes from sibling 'exercise_search' by indicating a complementary usage pattern.

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 states 'Use with exercise_search to build workout plans,' providing clear context for when to use this tool. However, it does not mention when not to use or alternative tools for similar purposes.

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