mess_get_info

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, and openWorldHint=true. The description adds valuable context by explicitly stating 'No auth required', which isn't covered by annotations. It also specifies the return format ('JSON array of MessInfo objects'), providing behavioral clarity beyond annotations.

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 extremely concise and front-loaded: the first sentence states the core purpose and key details (fields returned, no auth), and the second sentence specifies the return format. Every sentence earns its place with zero wasted words.

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 (0 parameters, rich annotations, output schema exists), the description is complete. It covers purpose, authentication context, return format, and distinguishes the tool adequately. With output schema handling return values, no additional explanation is needed.

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?

With 0 parameters and 100% schema description coverage, the baseline is 4. The description doesn't need to explain parameters, and it appropriately focuses on the tool's purpose and output instead.

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 verb 'Get' and resource 'info about all messes', specifying the exact fields returned (name, short_name, color, tags, rating, billing_id). It distinguishes itself from siblings like mess_get_me or mess_get_registration by focusing on comprehensive mess metadata rather than user-specific or registration data.

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 explicitly states 'No auth required', providing clear context about when authentication is unnecessary. However, it doesn't specify when to use this tool versus alternatives like mess_get_menus or mess_get_meal_timings for related information, leaving some sibling differentiation implicit.

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