set_diet_profile

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the behavioral disclosure burden. It indicates a mutating operation with 'set/update', but it does not explain whether bmr/tdee are calculated or overwritten, how a custom macroPreset is handled, whether the operation is idempotent, or what side effects occur on an existing profile.

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 a single, efficient sentence with no redundant words. It front-loads the action and resource, then gives the purpose, making it easy 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?

Despite a rich schema, this is a complex tool with nine parameters, six required fields, enums, and a nested customMacros object with a conditional requirement, and there is no output schema. The description does not clarify the conditional behavior around customMacros, whether bmr and tdee are optional computed values or overrides, or what the caller should expect as a result.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all parameters. The description adds only minimal framing around TDEE calculation and goal setup, which loosely relates to bmr, tdee, and weightGoal, but it does not add meaningful parameter-level semantics beyond 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 names a specific action (set/update), a clear resource (user diet profile), and the purpose (TDEE calculation and goal setup). It is easily distinguished from sibling get_diet_profile because it is a write operation rather than a read.

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 description implies when the tool should be used: when setting or updating the user's diet profile for TDEE-related calculations. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives like get_diet_profile or set_nutrition_goals, nor does it state prerequisites such as whether an existing profile must already exist.

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