Dietary Suggestions

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

Annotations already indicate read-only, non-destructive, and idempotent behavior. The description does not add behavioral traits beyond what annotations provide, such as authentication needs or rate limits, but it does not contradict them either.

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 very short, with a clear one-line purpose statement and a concise example. It is front-loaded and free of any fluff, though it could be slightly more informative without becoming verbose.

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?

The tool has no output schema and multiple parameters, yet the description does not explain what the output looks like (e.g., a list of foods, a set of guidelines). An AI agent lacks context on how to interpret the result.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage, the schema already documents all parameter details. The description's example request body provides a concrete usage illustration but does not add meaningful semantics 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 an element-based dietary focus with specific actions: emphasize/avoid foods and cooking style. This verb+resource combination makes its purpose distinct from sibling tools like wellness_herbs (herbs) or wellness_exercise (exercise).

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 lacks any guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, contexts where dietary suggestions are appropriate, or comparisons to other wellness tools.

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