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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, so the agent knows it's a write operation. The description adds value by listing available formulas and factors, but does not disclose side effects, authentication needs, or any constraints beyond the schema.

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 relatively concise, with a clear list of supported formulas and factors. However, it includes an internal note '[Flattened action: create]' which is irrelevant for the agent and adds clutter. The structure is adequate but not optimal.

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 complexity (12 parameters, multiple formulas/factors) and absence of output schema, the description should explain return values or response behavior. It only mentions bulk support but does not detail the output. Annotations are minimal, so the description fails to complete the picture.

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 0%. The description mentions concepts like formulas and activity factors but does not map them to specific parameters (e.g., 'mlg', 'peso'). The agent cannot infer meaning or constraints from the description alone.

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 'Create / update energy expenditure calculations in WebDiet' with specific verbs and resource. It lists supported formulas and factors. However, it does not differentiate from the sibling 'webdiet_calculo_energetico_write_save', which could cause confusion.

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 explains the actions (create, save) and mentions bulk support, but it does not provide when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., the sibling write_save tool). It also lacks guidance on prerequisites or conditions.

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