chipotle_meals

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden, and it answers the main questions: it returns preset definitions, lists the fields (id, name, type, description), and states there are no parameters. It doesn't explicitly claim read-only semantics or describe pagination, but for a no-input getter this is sufficient transparency.

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 short and front-loads the action and resource. The only flaw is slight redundancy: 'Returns Chipotle's preset meal definitions' restates the opening phrase, but it earns its place by adding the concrete example and field list.

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 zero-parameter catalog lookup, the description covers what the tool returns, the shape of each entry, and the absence of inputs. The lack of an output schema is mitigated by the explicit field list; only minor details like ordering or pagination are absent.

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?

The input schema is empty and the description explicitly says 'Takes no parameters,' so there is no parameter ambiguity for the agent to resolve. Zero-parameter tools need no further parameter documentation.

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 specific verb ('Get') and resource ('Chipotle's preset meal definitions'), then unpacks the resource with an example and the four fields returned. This is clearly distinct from sibling catalog tools like chipotle_menu and chipotle_ingredients, despite not naming them.

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 establishes that this is the unparameterized global catalog of preset meal combinations, which is enough for an agent to know the basic use case. However, it never explicitly contrasts it with chipotle_restaurant_meals, chipotle_menu, or chipotle_ingredients, so an agent must infer when each is appropriate from names alone.

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