create_diet_plan

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of disclosure. It clearly states the confirm-gated behavior (must be true to execute, preview otherwise). However, it omits other behavioral details like whether it overwrites existing plans, required permissions, or error handling.

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 two sentences, front-loading the main purpose and key behavior. It is efficient with no wasted words, though it could be more structured (e.g., listing parameters).

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 has 6 parameters, 4 required, and no output schema or annotations, the description is incomplete. It does not mention return values, format of the preview, error messages, or possible states after creation.

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 33% (only startDate and confirm have descriptions). The description adds value for the 'meals' parameter by showing an example format, but does not explain 'clientId', 'title', or 'endDate'. It partially compensates but not fully for low coverage.

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 specifies the verb 'Create' and resource 'diet plan for a client', and distinguishes from siblings like 'create_workout_plan' by noting it's confirm-gated. However, it could be more explicit about the scope (e.g., one diet plan per client).

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'list_diet_plans' or 'create_workout_plan'. It does not specify prerequisites, such as requiring an existing client, nor when a preview is appropriate.

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