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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the behavioral disclosure burden. It mentions the tool calculates and returns kcal_per_day, implying it is a read-only calculation, but does not explicitly state behavioral traits such as idempotency or 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?

The description is two sentences, each serving a clear purpose: stating the core functionality and pointing to related calculators. No extraneous 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?

The description covers purpose, inputs, and return value. Given the tool has a defined output schema, the mention of {kcal_per_day} is sufficient. However, in a server with many calculation tools, more differentiation from similar pet calculators (e.g., calculate_cat_food) would improve completeness.

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%, so the description should provide additional parameter context. It lists the three parameters but offers no details about valid ranges, units, or examples beyond what is in the schema (e.g., weight must be positive, age and activity have enums).

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 calculates daily dog food quantity based on weight, age, and activity level, and specifies the return value. It distinguishes from siblings by referencing the 'animaux' bundle via list_bundles.

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 for dog food calculation but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over other pet calculators. The reference to list_bundles provides a hint but no concrete guidance.

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