Nourish quickstart

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, indicating no mutations. The description adds context about adapting to current state (USDA key set, etc.), which provides behavioral detail beyond annotations but does not contradict them. The term 'setup walkthrough' could imply mutations, but it is not explicit.

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 (two sentences) and front-loaded: the first sentence states the purpose, and the second adds context and usage guidance with no wasted 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?

For a simple tool with one optional parameter and annotations present, the description covers the main purpose and usage context adequately. However, it lacks parameter information and does not differentiate from the similar sibling nourish_onboarding, leaving some gaps.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description should explain the parameters. However, it does not mention the single parameter 'response_format' (enum with default 'json'), leaving its meaning and usage unexplained.

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 it is a 'Personalized 3-step setup walkthrough for the human user', specifying the verb (setup walkthrough) and resource (human user). It also provides a distinct usage scenario: 'Call this first when the user asks ''how do I use this?''' which helps differentiate it from siblings like nourish_onboarding.

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 tells when to use the tool ('Call this first when the user asks ''how do I use this?'''), but it does not mention when not to use it or suggest alternative tools such as nourish_onboarding for a more comprehensive setup.

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