Update intake

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

Annotations provide idempotentHint and non-destructiveHint, but description adds value by disclosing that quantity/grams_estimate changes rescale nutrients to keep summaries consistent. This is beyond what annotations offer, though other fields' effects remain unspecified.

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?

Three sentences with no redundancy: first sentence states purpose, second adds key behavioral detail, third provides crucial usage restriction. Front-loaded and efficient.

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?

Despite having 9 parameters and no output schema, the description omits details on field semantics, return value, prerequisites, and behavior for fields other than quantity/grams_estimate. The nutrient rescaling note is helpful but insufficient for full contextual understanding.

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 only mentions two parameters (quantity and grams_estimate) in context. It does not explain the meaning or usage of the other 7 parameters, leaving agents to infer from names alone.

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 ('Update a local intake entry by id') and adds specificity about nutrient rescaling when quantity or grams_estimate changes, distinguishing it from other update or intake tools like nourish_log_intake or nourish_profile_update.

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?

Provides strong guidance with 'Gated: requires explicit user intent — agents must not call this autonomously', clarifying when not to use. Implicitly distinguishes from alternatives like nourish_log_intake (create) or nourish_delete_intake (delete), but lacks explicit comparisons.

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