share_meal_template

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but 'Share... to the community database' only states the action and destination. It does not disclose whether the share is reversible, whether it makes the template publicly visible, what happens if the template is already shared, or any permission requirements.

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 front-loaded sentence with no redundant words or repeated schema information. 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 one-parameter tool the definition is minimally usable: the agent knows the action, target, and required parameter. However, the absence of annotations and output schema, combined with no mention of side effects or error conditions, leaves the context incomplete for a community-mutating operation.

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%, and the templateId parameter is already documented as 'ID of the meal template to share.' The description adds no additional parameter semantics, so it correctly relies on the schema for parameter meaning.

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 ('Share'), a clear resource ('user meal template'), and a destination ('community database'), which is a complete and unambiguous statement of the tool's function. This distinguishes it from siblings like share_food_to_community and search_community_templates based on the noun being shared.

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 the use case: share a meal template for community visibility. However, it gives no explicit guidance about when to choose this over sibling tools such as share_food_to_community or how it relates to search_community_templates, leaving comparison to the agent.

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