create_workout

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

Annotations already indicate a write operation (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false). The description adds meaningful behavioral context: it resolves exercise names from the catalog, builds the full API payload, calculates metrics, saves, and syncs to the watch. This goes beyond the annotations and helps the agent anticipate side effects.

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?

Three sentences with no filler. The core action is front-loaded, followed by the internal steps and the sync side effect. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

For a create tool with a rich schema and annotations covering the write nature, the description is complete enough. It explains the resolution behavior and the sync side effect. It could mention error cases (e.g., unmatched exercise names) but that is not essential for invoking the tool correctly.

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 all parameters. The description adds high-level context (resolves exercise names, calculates metrics) but does not add per-parameter meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 states a specific verb ('Create'), a specific resource ('strength workout on COROS Training Hub'), and the key behaviors (resolves exercise names, builds payload, calculates metrics, saves). It is clearly distinguishable from siblings like create_structured_workout and update_workout.

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 context (creating a strength workout that syncs to the watch) but does not explicitly state when to prefer this over create_structured_workout or when not to use it. With many sibling tools, explicit routing would help, but the core use case is clear.

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