papajohns_nutrition

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

With no annotations, the description fully covers behavior. It discloses the output (nutrition-facts panel for every item in one category), includes variants and serving sizes, and clarifies scope (national reference data). No contradictions or gaps.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose, then elaborates on output details and scope. Every sentence adds value; no fluff. It's long but dense with useful 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?

For a single-parameter tool with no output schema, the description thoroughly covers what it returns, the nature of the data, and where to go for related lookups. Nothing an agent needs to call it correctly is missing.

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 100% with a parameter description listing all allowed categories. The tool description adds context by grouping categories (full pizzas vs ingredient families) and explaining the meaning, which goes beyond the schema's list but doesn't add syntax details.

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 specific verb (Get), resource (Papa John's nutritional-details category), and elaborates on what that means (returns nutrition-facts panels for every item in a category). It also distinguishes from siblings by clarifying it's national reference data, not per-store data, and points to the directory for store lookup.

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?

Explicitly states when NOT to use this tool (for per-store pricing) and names the alternative (GET /papajohns/directory). It also implies when to use it: when nutrition facts for a category are needed. This is clear routing guidance.

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