create_households_mealplansCreate a household meal plan entry for a specific date. Specify the meal type and optionally link a recipe or add notes to organize meals.
Create One
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| date | Yes | ||
| text | No | ||
| recipeId | No | ||
| entryType | No | ||
| accept-language | No |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v3.20.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description bears the full burden of behavioral disclosure. 'Create One' reveals nothing about side effects, validation rules, required fields, or response behavior. An agent cannot infer what happens when this tool is invoked.
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?
Two words are not conciseness; they are under-specification. The description contains no useful content and does not earn its place, though it is not verbose.
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 five parameters, a required date, an enum, and an output schema, this description is completely inadequate. Even with an output schema present, an agent cannot determine how to construct a valid request or what the tool is meant to accomplish beyond the name.
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 adds no meaning to the five parameters. It does not explain that date is required, what entryType values mean, how text and recipeId interact, or the role of accept-language. The agent is left entirely to the schema.
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 'Create One' is essentially a tautology that restates the tool name without specifying what entity is created, what a mealplan entry consists of, or how this differs from sibling tools. It provides no verb-plus-resource clarity beyond the already evident name.
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?
There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as create_households_mealplans_random, create_households_mealplans_rules, or list_households_mealplans. The description provides no context, prerequisites, or exclusions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.