Suggest next meal

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, so the description doesn't need to repeat that. It adds context about input sources but does not disclose behavior like how suggestions are generated, what happens if insufficient data, or potential limitations. Acceptable but not enriched 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?

A single sentence that conveys the essential purpose without any fluff. It is appropriately front-loaded and efficient, making it quick for an agent to parse.

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 tool with 9 parameters, 0 required, no output schema, and a complex domain (nutrition suggestions), the description is too brief. It lacks information about the return format, how suggestions are tailored, or what happens when data is missing. Given the richness of context needed, this is inadequate.

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 coverage is very low (11%), with only auto_wearable having a description. The overall description fails to compensate by explaining other parameters like date, focus, meal_type, or how wearable_context is used. The agent would need to infer meaning from names alone, which is insufficient.

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 verb 'Suggest' and resource 'next meal', specifying sources (today's intake, goals, personal memory, wearable context). It effectively distinguishes from siblings like nourish_estimate_meal (estimates nutrients) and nourish_log_intake (logs). This is a specific and helpful purpose statement.

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?

No explicit guidance on when or when not to use this tool compared to alternatives like nourish_daily_coach or nourish_estimate_meal. The description implies it's for meal recommendations but fails to provide context for selection among siblings.

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