list_meal_templates

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. 'List all saved...' clearly indicates a read-only operation and broad scope, which is helpful. It does not mention sorting, pagination, or whether shared/community templates are excluded, but for a zero-parameter listing tool this is a reasonable level of transparency.

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 one concise sentence with no filler. The parenthetical definition 'reusable food combinations' adds value without bloating the text. Every word earns its place.

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 no-parameter listing tool, the description is nearly complete: it covers the operation, resource, and scope. It could be slightly more explicit about excluding community templates or describing the response shape, but given the trivial input surface and simple read behavior, this is a minor gap.

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?

There are zero parameters and schema description coverage is 100%, so no parameter documentation is needed. The description adds semantic clarity about what 'meal templates' are, which indirectly supports the empty schema. Baseline for zero parameters is 4.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') and a clear resource ('saved meal templates'), and defines the concept with 'reusable food combinations.' This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_meal_entries (entries vs templates) and search_community_templates (saved vs community). The scope is immediately clear.

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 usage context is implied: use this when you need all of the user's saved meal templates. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives such as search_community_templates for community templates. The guidance is adequate but not explicit.

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