View supply chain / traceability data for a product (FSMA 204 style). Shows farm-to-shelf journey: grow, harvest, pack, ship, receive, retail. Currently populated for demo products — designed for real-time FSMA 204 data integration.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| product_id | No | Product ID to trace | |
| product_name | No | Or search by product name |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations provided. Description states it shows journey data but lacks details on data freshness, read-only nature, or any limitations beyond demo population.
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 with clear front-loaded purpose. No redundancy, each sentence adds value.
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 no output schema and no annotations, description should elaborate on return format or data structure. Current version is adequate but incomplete for practical use.
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% with both parameters described. Description adds context that product_id and product_name are searchable but no additional semantic value beyond 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?
Describes a specific verb 'View' and resource 'supply chain/traceability data' for a product. Lists journey stages (farm-to-shelf) and distinguishes from siblings like food_recall_check or food_nutrition.
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?
Mentions demo product population and design for real-time integration, implying current limitations but no explicit when-to-use or alternatives compared to siblings.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool targets a specific aspect of food data: prices, nutrition, recalls, dietary filters, supply chain, etc. Overlaps are minimal and clearly differentiated by scope, such as full nutrition vs. ingredient lists.
All tools consistently use the 'food_' prefix followed by a descriptive snake_case term. While the stems vary between nouns and verbs, the pattern is uniform and predictable.
With 18 tools, the server comprehensively covers the grocery domain including prices, nutrition, recalls, dietary needs, supply chain, and more. Each tool serves a distinct purpose without being overwhelming.
The tool set is remarkably complete, covering search, detailed product info, price comparisons across supply chain, dietary constraints, household meal planning, recalls, receipts, and data source transparency. No critical gaps apparent.