get_repeated_items

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It clearly states what the tool returns, which is the key behavioral aspect. It does not disclose non-obvious traits like rate limits or auth, but for a simple list operation it is adequate.

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?

Two well-structured sentences, no wasted words. The first sentence conveys the core purpose, and the second adds necessary detail about return contents.

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 zero-parameter input and existence of an output schema, the description is complete enough. It lists all relevant return fields, and the sibling tools provide context for this read-only list operation.

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 tool has zero parameters, and the input schema is complete (100% coverage). The description adds no parameter information, which is appropriate given the absence of parameters. Baseline for 0 params is 4.

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 'List all recurring food entries' using a specific verb and resource. It also details the returned fields (food name, quantity, etc.), which unambiguously defines the tool's purpose.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives like add_repeat_item or delete_repeat_item. The usage context is implied by the 'List' verb, but the description does not provide when-not or alternative recommendations.

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