households_mealplans_create_one

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden, yet it only repeats the HTTP route. It does not state that this is a mutating write scoped to the logged-in household, what the minimum body looks like (date is required), whether duplicate entries for the same date are allowed, or what the endpoint returns on success.

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 purpose is front-loaded in the first sentence, but the entry is heavily bloated: the title is restated ('Create One — Households: Mealplans'), followed by the same phrase again plus a padded keyword list ('households mealplans create one, add meal plan, new meal plan, make meal plan, write meal plan... post, mealie'). Almost none of this adds information for an agent.

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 mutation tool with no annotations, no output schema, and 0% parameter description coverage, the description should at minimum explain the body contract and the household scoping. It provides only the endpoint path, leaving key calling details to be inferred from the nested schema.

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% and the single parameter is a nested CreatePlanEntry object with a required 'date' and an entryType enum. The description adds no explanation of these fields, so it fails to compensate for the schema's lack of descriptions even though the JSON schema structure itself is reasonably parseable.

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?

States a clear verb+resource ('Create meal plan') and the underlying route POST /api/households/mealplans, which lets an agent distinguish it from households_mealplans_get_one/update_one/delete_one. However, the description never clarifies that it creates a single meal plan *entry* (with date, entryType, recipeId), and the purpose is buried under dozens of keywords rather than refined.

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?

No when-to-use guidance at all. There is no mention of when to prefer this over create_random_meal, households_mealplans_update_one (to edit an existing entry), or households_mealplans_get_all. Nothing about prerequisites such as a household context or whether an authenticated household member is required.

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