Remember meal

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

Annotations already indicate idempotency and non-read-only. Description adds critical condition 'after explicit user intent' and 'locally', providing additional safety context beyond 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?

Single concise sentence with a clear example. No fluff.

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?

No output schema, description fails to mention return value or behavior for retrieving saved memories. Lacks explanation of non-required parameters. For an 8-param tool, too minimal.

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 only 38% schema description coverage, the description should compensate but only illustrates two required parameters (label, meal_text). Undocumented params like tags, notes, aliases, response_format, default_meal_type remain unclear.

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?

Clearly states the verb (save), resource (personal meal shortcut), and condition (after explicit user intent). Example distinguishes from meal logging and estimation tools.

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?

Implies usage after explicit user intent but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like nourish_log_intake or nourish_estimate_meal. No exclusion criteria.

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