Nourish onboarding

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint true. The description adds value by specifying the exact number of questions, that it is an 'onboarding flow', and that data is stored non-secretly at a specific path. No contradiction with annotations.

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 concise, consisting of three short sentences. It front-loads the primary action, then adds usage guidance and data handling details without any redundancy or unnecessary 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?

The tool is simple with two optional parameters and no output schema. The description covers purpose, usage context, read-only nature, data storage, and the return of a fixed set of questions. It is sufficiently complete for an agent to understand when and how to use the tool.

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 explain the two parameters (locale, response_format) or their default values. However, the parameter names and enum choices are self-explanatory given the tool's purpose. The description adds no explicit parameter semantics but is adequate due to simplicity.

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 returns a specific set of questions (11-question onboarding flow) for the shared Delx Wellness profile, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like nourish_profile_get by focusing on the flow rather than profile data.

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 explicit guidance: the agent should ask these questions next to enable personalization. It explains the purpose and data handling (non-secret, stored locally). While it does not list alternatives or when to avoid, the context is clear enough for an agent to decide to call this tool early in the interaction.

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