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

Annotations already cover readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds meaningful behavioral constraints beyond annotations: the 31-day maximum range per call and the parameter inference rules (default today, end_date logic for week/range queries). This goes 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?

The description is well-structured with clear sections and bullets, but it contains some redundancy (e.g., the note about update_meal/delete_meal resolving appears twice in slightly different forms). It is still efficient overall and not bloated.

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 output schema exists, the description doesn't need to enumerate all return fields, but it still mentions key outputs (meal ID, date, type, food description, macros). It covers purpose, parameters, usage, routing, and constraints, providing everything an agent needs to invoke it 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?

Both parameters (date and end_date) are fully described with format (YYYY-MM-DD), optionality, and specific semantics (start vs. single date, end of range). The description also explains default behavior and inference rules, making both parameters unambiguous.

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 lists meals logged for a date or range, with a specific verb ('List'), resource ('meals'), and scope (date/range). It also distinguishes it from siblings like show_meal_diary and show_week_macros via the ROUTING section.

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?

Provides explicit when-to-use guidance: answering 'what did I eat today/this week/yesterday?', reviewing logged meals, and retrieving an ID after an ambiguous update/delete match. It also explains when it is not required (update_meal/delete_meal can resolve on their own) and how to handle longer periods with multiple calls.

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