List Foods

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false. The description adds value by disclosing that it returns summaries for quick scanning and supports predictable iteration, giving a sense of the response style and deterministic behavior without contradicting the 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 a single, front-loaded sentence that packs the core purpose and key features without any filler. Every phrase contributes meaning, making it extremely 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?

For a tool with 7 parameters and nested schemas, the description covers the primary listing use case and core features but omits several optional parameters that remain unexplained in both the description and schema. The presence of an output schema and annotations helps, but the parameter coverage gap makes this only minimally complete.

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 description coverage is only 43%, leaving includeRaw, sampleSize, previewOnly, and estimateOnly without descriptions in either the schema or the tool description. The description only rementions pagination, sorting, and brand filters, which are already documented in the schema, so it does little to illuminate the less obvious parameters.

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 identifies this as a page-oriented listing endpoint for predictable iteration when the data type or brand is already known. It distinguishes itself from search-oriented siblings like search-foods by specifying a known-data scenario and by listing concrete capabilities (pagination, sorting, brand filters).

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 phrase 'when you already know the data type or brand' provides clear context for when this tool is appropriate, implying it should not be used for open-ended searches. However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools or state when not to use it, so it stops short of full exclusion/alternative guidance.

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