get_saved_meals

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the tool is clearly a safe, read-only operation. The description adds value by disclosing the auth requirement, which annotations don't cover. There is no contradiction.

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 two concise sentences with zero waste. The first sentence states the core purpose, the second provides critical usage guidance. 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?

Given the low complexity (1 optional parameter, no output schema, rich annotations), the description is complete. It covers the essential purpose, filtering, and auth requirement. No additional details are needed for effective use.

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%, so the parameter 'meal' is fully documented in the schema (enum values and description). The description merely restates the filter option without adding new meaning. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 ('Get') and resource ('user's saved meals') and clearly distinguishes itself from siblings by mentioning optional filtering by meal type. It does not confuse with other saved meal tools like create_saved_meal or 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 explicitly states a prerequisite ('Requires profile auth (check_auth_status first)'), providing clear context for when to use this tool. However, it does not specify when not to use it or mention alternatives among sibling tools.

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