calculate_race_nutrition

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It specifies the computed metrics and units, but does not disclose assumptions (e.g., reliance on athlete profile data), return format, or edge-case behavior. It is a read-only calculation, but that is not stated.

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?

A single concise sentence that front-loads the primary function and lists key outputs. No 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?

For a simple calculation with one parameter and no output schema, the description provides the essential computed values. However, it omits context about required underlying data (e.g., athlete profile) and behavioral assumptions, which could be important for an agent.

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 sole parameter targetRaceHours is fully described in the schema with 'Target race duration in hours'. The description does not add additional semantics about the parameter beyond the calculation outcome.

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 uses a specific verb 'Calculates' and names the exact resources: Carb Loading (g/kg), fluid (mL/hr), sodium, and gel schedule. It clearly distinguishes this from sibling tools that calculate other metrics like vdot or acwr.

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 implies use for race nutrition planning but provides no explicit guidance on when to use it over alternatives or any excluding conditions. It is self-evident but not explicit.

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