analyze_nutrition

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses returns (ingredient breakdown, DMB conversion, carb estimation, nutritional context), which is transparent. It does not mention error handling or permissions, but the read-only nature is implied.

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 three sentences: action, returns, usage. It is front-loaded and efficient with 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 simplicity of a single parameter and no output schema, the description adequately covers purpose and usage. It lists returns, which compensates for lack of output schema. Could mention product existence constraints, but overall complete.

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 coverage is 100% with a description for productId. The tool description adds context that productId identifies a cat food product, enhancing meaning beyond the schema alone. Baseline 3 is raised due to this added context.

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 tool analyzes nutritional content of a cat food product by productId, listing specific returns like ingredient breakdown and carb estimation. It distinguishes itself from siblings like get_product_detail (general details) and search_products (search).

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 when user asks about nutrition, ingredients, or carb content of a specific product', providing clear context. It does not mention alternatives or when not to use, but the guidance is sufficient.

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