Lookup barcode

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

Annotations provide strong transparency (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint), reducing the burden on the description. The description adds the source ('Open Food Facts') but does not elaborate on response behavior, data freshness, or potential errors. With annotations covering safety, this is adequate but minimal.

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 a single, efficient sentence with no superfluous words. It frontloads the action and resource, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly.

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 the tool (a barcode lookup), the presence of rich annotations, and lack of output schema, the description is reasonably complete. It covers the core functionality but could briefly mention the response format or data source specifics.

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 50% (only the 'barcode' parameter has a description). The tool description does not add additional meaning or context for 'response_format', leaving its purpose unclear beyond the enum values. The description fails to compensate for the missing schema description.

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 'Lookup' and the resource 'a packaged food barcode in Open Food Facts'. It effectively distinguishes the tool from siblings like 'nourish_decode_barcode_image' and 'nourish_lookup_barcode_image' by specifying it directly looks up a barcode value.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., when to use 'nourish_search_food' or 'nourish_get_food'). No context on prerequisites or exclusions is given, leaving the agent to infer usage without support.

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