copy_food_entries

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

Annotations already indicate a non-read-only, non-idempotent mutation ('readOnlyHint': false, 'idempotentHint': false). The description adds valuable behavioral context by stating that authentication is required and directs the agent to check auth status first. No contradictions.

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 sentences, no redundancy. The first sentence states the core purpose and optional filter; the second adds a key prerequisite. 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?

With no output schema and three simple parameters, the description covers purpose and auth. However, it omits what the tool returns (e.g., success confirmation, count of copied entries) and doesn't address behavior on conflicts or duplicates. This limits completeness for a mutation 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 coverage is 100% with clear descriptions for all three parameters. The description adds meaning by noting that the 'meal' parameter is optional, clarifying its role as a filter. This is a useful addition beyond the schema's 'Meal type' label.

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 action ('Copy food entries'), the resource scope ('from one date to another'), and an optional modifier ('filtered by meal'). This specific verb+resource distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_food_entry, delete_food_entry, and copy_saved_meal_entries.

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 mentions the prerequisite 'Requires profile auth (check_auth_status first)' but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like copy_saved_meal_entries (which copies from saved meals, not dates). Usage is implied but not contrasted.

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