iFood loyalty

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so 'Read-only' merely repeats readOnlyHint. The description adds no behavioral detail about what data is returned, how privacy_mode affects access, pagination, or any other operational traits.

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 extremely short, but this is under-specification rather than effective conciseness. 'Club / stamps' is unexplained and 'Read-only' duplicates an annotation, so the text does not earn its place with useful information.

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?

Although the tool has no required parameters and rich safety annotations, there is no explanation of the output content, the meaning of 'club/stamps', or how this tool relates to sibling tools like ifood_benefits. With no output schema and minimal description, an agent has insufficient context to select and invoke it confidently.

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%, and the description does not mention privacy_mode or response_format at all. The enum values are somewhat self-explanatory, but the description adds no meaning and fails to compensate for the complete lack of parameter documentation.

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 'Club / stamps. Read-only.' conveys a vague subject area and the read-only nature, but it lacks a clear verb and resource phrase such as 'gets loyalty card stamp status'. It does not distinguish this tool from siblings like ifood_benefits or ifood_previous_items.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as ifood_benefits or ifood_list_orders. The only implied trigger is the loyalty theme, but no explicit context, exclusions, or alternative routing is given.

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