edit_saved_meal_item

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

Annotations indicate idempotentHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, meaning the tool is safe to retry but modifies data. The description adds that serving_id cannot be changed and requires auth. This adds value but does not elaborate on side effects or error conditions for a mutation tool.

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 short sentences front-loaded with the primary action and editable items, followed by constraints and auth requirement. No wasted 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 the tool's moderate complexity (3 params, no output schema) and absence of output schema, the description covers the key behavioral aspects: what can be edited, what cannot, and a prerequisite. It is complete enough for an AI agent to use correctly, though it could mention the return value or cancellation conditions.

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 low (33%), so the description must compensate. It names two editable fields (name or units) mapping to saved_meal_item_name and number_of_units, and explicitly states that serving_id cannot be changed. It does not explain saved_meal_item_id beyond being the identifier, but its purpose is clear from context.

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 edits a food item in a saved meal, specifying editable fields (name or units). It distinguishes from sibling tools like add_saved_meal_item and delete_saved_meal_item by focusing on modification, though it does not explicitly differentiate from edit_saved_meal.

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 provides explicit context: it edits a specific type of item (food item in a saved meal) and includes a prerequisite to check auth status. However, it lacks guidance on when not to use this tool or alternatives (e.g., when to use edit_saved_meal instead).

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