mealie_create_mealplan

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It adds the date format requirement, which is useful, but does not mention potential side effects (e.g., duplicate handling), required permissions, or what happens on creation. The output schema may cover return values, but the description provides minimal behavioral context beyond 'create'.

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 and front-loads the core purpose. Both sentences add value: the first identifies the action, the second provides a crucial constraint. 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?

Given the tool has six parameters, no annotations, and zero schema descriptions, the description is severely incomplete. It only addresses purpose and date format, leaving the behavior and semantics of the other parameters undefined. Even with an output schema, this is not enough to guide correct invocation.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for the six parameters. It only explains the 'date' format, leaving text, title, recipe_id, entry_type, and confirmed_by_user entirely unexplained. This is a significant gap for a tool with multiple parameters.

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 the action ('Create a household mealplan entry') and identifies the resource (mealplan entry). It distinguishes from sibling tools like mealie_update_mealplan and mealie_delete_mealplan by specifying creation, and adds a specific constraint for the date format.

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 usage for creating new mealplan entries but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., updating or deleting). It does provide a critical usage requirement (ISO date format), which adds some guidance, but lacks exclusions or alternative context.

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