get_most_eaten_foods

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint as true, so the description does not need to repeat those. The description adds value by specifying the authentication requirement, which is not covered by annotations. However, it does not disclose other behavioral traits like pagination, sorting, or limits on the returned list.

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, front-loaded with purpose, no filler. Every word serves a clear purpose: stating the action, the optional filter, and the auth requirement. This is an ideal level of conciseness.

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 simple read-only tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description is complete. It conveys the purpose, the optional filter, and the authentication prerequisite. No additional information is required for an agent to invoke this tool correctly.

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% (the single parameter 'meal' has a description and enum values). The description merely restates that the result is 'optionally filtered by meal', adding no new meaning beyond the schema. Per the rubric, with high coverage the baseline is 3, and no additional semantics are provided.

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-resource pair ('Get the user's most eaten foods') and clearly states the optional meal filter. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_recently_eaten_foods, get_favorite_foods, and search_foods, which have different semantics.

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 states a prerequisite: 'Requires profile auth (check_auth_status first).' This provides clear context for when to use the tool. However, it does not explicitly exclude alternatives or state when not to use this tool versus other similar food listing tools.

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