feedings_create_feeding

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but 'Record a feeding session' only implies a create action. It does not disclose anything about validation, required fields, timer behavior, or the output format, leaving the agent to infer the operational semantics from the schema and tool name.

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 sentence with no filler or redundant phrasing, making it highly concise and front-loaded. However, it is arguably too sparse for an 8-parameter tool, though conciseness itself is handled well.

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?

Despite the rich schema and output schema, the description does not provide important contextual guidance such as how timer_id relates to start/end, the meaning of feeding_type and method choices, or when to prefer this tool over the update variant. It is minimally adequate but incomplete for a tool with this many parameters and no annotations.

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% parameter description coverage, so the schema already documents each parameter including units, formats, and defaults. The description adds no extra parameter-level meaning, which is acceptable given the schema's thoroughness, warranting the baseline score.

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 'Record a feeding session' is a clear verb+resource statement indicating a create operation. It distinguishes itself as the create variant from siblings like feedings_update_feeding and feedings_delete_feeding, though it does not explicitly name them.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as feedings_update_feeding or feedings_delete_feeding. It does not mention important selection criteria like using timer_id versus explicit start/end times, or when to create a feeding versus a pumping session.

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