get_daily_nutrition

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It implicitly indicates a read-only operation ('Get daily nutrition summary') but does not explicitly state that no data is modified. It lacks details on authentication, rate limits, or side effects, though such details are not critical for a simple retrieval tool.

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 front-loaded with the tool's purpose and return values, followed by a concise parameter specification. No unnecessary sentences or redundancies. Could be slightly more compact by merging the parameter info into the main text, but still efficient.

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 that an output schema exists (has output_schema: true), the description appropriately lists expected return fields and date range defaults. It covers the essential aspects for an agent to decide and invoke the tool correctly. Minor omission: no mention of potential empty results or error cases, but these are likely captured in the output schema.

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 description compensates for the input schema's lack of property descriptions by detailing each parameter's format ('YYYY-MM-DD') and defaults (7 days ago for start_date, today for end_date). This adds clear meaning beyond the schema's basic type and title.

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 retrieves daily nutrition summaries with macro totals (calories, protein, carbs, fat, fiber). It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_food_log and get_macro_targets by specifying 'daily overviews and trend analysis,' but does not explicitly list alternative scenarios.

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 advises using this tool for 'quick daily overviews and trend analysis.' However, it does not specify when not to use it or mention alternatives among siblings, which would improve differentiation.

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