households_mealplan_rules_get_all

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden, but it only hints at read-only via the keyword 'read-only'. It says nothing about pagination behavior, default ordering (orderDirection defaults to desc), result limits, or what the response contains for a 7-parameter paginated list endpoint.

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 core sentence is front-loaded and short, but it is followed by an enormous keyword-stuffing block that repeats 'rule/rules' and every synonym. This bulk adds noise without information and undermines the conciseness of the useful portion.

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?

For a 7-parameter paginated list tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description should explain filtering, ordering, and pagination expectations. Instead it omits all of that, leaving the agent without enough context to invoke it correctly beyond recognizing it as a list operation.

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% across 7 parameters (page, perPage, orderBy, orderDirection, queryFilter, paginationSeed, orderByNullPosition), and the description explains none of them. It does not clarify pagination, filtering via queryFilter, or ordering semantics, leaving all parameter meaning undocumented.

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 a clear verb (list/get-all) and resource (households mealplan rules), plus the underlying endpoint. This lets an agent distinguish it from siblings like households_mealplan_rules_get_one, create_one, update_one, and delete_one. It loses a point because 'Get All — Households: Mealplan Rules' largely restates the name rather than adding independent framing.

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?

There is no explicit guidance on when to use this vs alternatives such as get_one or the broader mealplans endpoints. The keyword list implies list/search/fetch synonyms but gives no conditions, prerequisites, or exclusions. An agent must infer usage from the name alone.

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