wendys_menu

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

Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the burden. It discloses the return type (list of items with specific fields), and notes subtle behavior like combo detection and required customization flag. However, it doesn't mention pagination, potential errors, or whether the list is exhaustive per category. It's moderately transparent but not exhaustive.

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 concise (~3 sentences) but information-dense. It front-loads the primary purpose and then details the output in compact list form. No fluff, and it efficiently uses parentheses for clarifications.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (one parameter, no output schema), the description covers the essential usage information: what it returns, how to get the category slug, and special cases. It lacks details on edge cases (e.g., invalid category slug) but that's minor for a listing tool.

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% (one parameter 'category' described as 'Category slug from /wendys/categories'). The description reiterates this but adds a bit more: explicitly linking to the categories endpoint. Since the schema already covers the parameter, the baseline is 3, and the description adds minimal extra semantics beyond that.

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's purpose: list items in one Wendy's menu category, with specific detail on what data is returned. It distinguishes itself from siblings like wendys_categories and wendys_item by focusing on category listing, and specifically references the sibling category tool for input.

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 gives clear guidance on the input parameter (category slug from /wendys/categories), which effectively tells the agent when to use this tool (after fetching categories). However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives like wendys_item for individual item details, though the context implies the distinction.

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