get_nutrition_range

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It only lists parameters without disclosing behavioral traits such as what nutrition data is returned (e.g., calories, macros), authentication needs, rate limits, or whether data is read-only.

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?

Description is very concise: three lines, no fluff. However, it could be improved by front-loading the purpose and adding a usage note. Still, it is efficient.

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?

Output schema exists, so return values need not be explained. But the description lacks details on the scope of 'nutrition data' (e.g., which metrics). Compared to siblings, it is unclear how this differs from get_nutrition_summary. Adequate but minimal.

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 0%, but description adds only the date format (YYYY-MM-DD) beyond the schema. No constraints like valid ranges, ordering, or relationship between dates are provided. Minimal added value.

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?

Description clearly states 'Get daily nutrition data for a date range,' specifying the verb (get), resource (nutrition data), and scope (daily, date range). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_nutrition_summary or analyze_meal_patterns.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention when not to use, prerequisites, or compare to siblings like get_food_log or get_nutrition_summary.

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