Search FatSecret Food Database

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint, establishing a safe read operation. The description adds that it returns basic nutrition info per serving and mentions pagination via page and max_results, but this is already in the schema. No new behavioral traits 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 concise with three short paragraphs: purpose, args with examples, and return format. No redundant information, well-structured, and easy to parse.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description should explain return structure thoroughly. It states 'List of foods with id, name, description (brief nutrition summary)' but does not specify if serving_id is included or if additional fields exist. Given the openWorldHint, this is minimally acceptable but could be more precise.

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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by providing example queries ('chicken breast', 'jasmine rice'), clarifying pagination defaults, and explaining that the 'description' field contains a brief nutrition summary. This goes beyond the schema.

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 'Search the FatSecret food database by name' and indicates it returns food items with basic nutrition info. It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like fatsecret_create_food_entry or fatsecret_get_food, which are mutation or retrieval of specific items.

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 says 'Use this to find food_id and serving_id needed for logging diary entries,' providing clear context for when to use this tool. It does not explicitly mention when not to use it, but the sibling tools list makes alternatives obvious.

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