get_food_details

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint false, which cover safety and idempotence. The description adds that the tool returns nutrition and serving sizes and that food_id comes from search_foods, but does not disclose additional behavioral details such as the response structure or how it handles missing data. With rich annotations, the description's incremental value is moderate.

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 concise (two sentences plus an args section) and well-structured, with each sentence serving a purpose. It front-loads the core action and returns information, then provides usage guidance. No unnecessary words.

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?

Given that an output schema exists (so return values are already defined), the simple one-parameter tool is fully described. The description covers the tool's purpose, parameter origin, and integration with sibling tools, meeting all needs for a complete definition.

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%, so the description must compensate. It explains that food_id is 'Food ID from search_foods results', which adds critical context beyond the schema's type and title. This effectively guides the agent in providing the correct value.

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 tool retrieves detailed food information including nutrition and serving sizes. It distinguishes from siblings like search_foods (which provides basic info) and get_food_log (which returns logged entries), making the purpose specific and well-differentiated.

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 explicitly instructs to use this tool after search_foods to obtain full nutrient profiles and serving sizes, providing clear usage context and sequence. It effectively guides the agent on when to apply the tool relative to other tools.

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