add_exercise

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

Annotations already mark the operation as non-read-only, non-destructive, and idempotent, while the description adds useful context: date defaults to today, calories must be positive, and wrong entries can later be corrected or deleted. It does not elaborate on idempotency semantics, but it does not contradict the 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 short and front-loaded: purpose, sibling routing, and parameter list are compactly presented with no filler. Every sentence contributes essential 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's low complexity, existing annotations, and presence of an output schema, the description is complete enough for an agent to call it correctly. It covers all parameter semantics, default behavior, and correction/deletion paths with no critical gaps.

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 0 percent, yet the description documents all four parameters with added meaning: name is what the exercise was called, minutes is duration in minutes, calories_burned is a positive number, and date is YYYY-MM-DD defaulting to today. This fully compensates for the absent schema descriptions.

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 opens with the specific action 'Log an exercise entry,' clearly naming the verb and resource. It also distinguishes itself from siblings by noting that wrong entries can be corrected with edit_exercise or removed with remove_exercise.

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?

It states that this tool is for logging an exercise entry and explicitly routes corrections to edit_exercise and deletions to remove_exercise. This gives an agent clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance against the most relevant alternatives.

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