taco-br-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Get fatty acid profile of a food

get_fatty_acids

Read-only

Retrieve the fatty acid profile (saturated, mono/polyunsaturated, omega-3/6, EPA, DHA, trans) for a TACO food by ID, per 100 g or scaled to grams.

Instructions

Fatty acid profile (saturated, mono/polyunsaturated, omega-3/6, EPA, DHA, trans, and individual acids) of one TACO food by id, per 100 g or scaled to grams. Only 423 of 597 foods have it; others return available:false (not zero). Tr is {"trace":true}, missing is null.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`grams`	No	Quantity in grams of edible portion. Omit for the table basis of 100 g.
`food_id`	Yes	TACO food number, as returned by search_food.
`nutrients`	No	Keys to return (e.g. "saturated_g", "dha_c22_6_g", "c18_3_n3_g"). Omit for all.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`food`	Yes
`notes`	Yes	Caveats about this table, this food or this answer.
`scaled`	Yes	True when amounts were computed from the per-100 g table values for another quantity.
`source`	Yes	Citation for the data.
`available`	Yes	False when this TACO table has no row for the food. That is missing data, not zero: nutrients is empty.
`nutrients`	Yes	Requested entries, in table order. Empty when available is false.
`basis_grams`	Yes	Quantity the amounts refer to, in grams of edible portion.
`foods_with_data`	No	Only when available is false and the table is small: the foods it does cover.
`trace_nutrients`	Yes	Keys reported as trace (Tr).
`not_analyzed_nutrients`	Yes	Keys with no value in the TACO table; not zero.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.2.0Oct 31, 2026

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond readOnlyHint=true, it discloses the partial-coverage behavior (423/597), the critical distinction that missing data yields available:false rather than zeros, and the sentinel encodings Tr = {"trace":true} and null for missing. These are exactly the traps that would cause an agent to misreport a food as zero-fat.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Three dense sentences, front-loaded with what is returned, then the caveat, then the encoding conventions. No filler and nothing repeated from the schema.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

An output schema exists, yet the description still supplies the return-value semantics an agent needs (trace vs null vs available:false). Combined with the complete parameter schema and readOnly annotation, nothing required to call it correctly is missing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3; the description adds value by clarifying the 100 g default basis versus gram-scaled output and by naming the nutrient groups (saturated, mono/poly, omega-3/6, EPA, DHA, trans, individual acids) that map to the `nutrients` filter keys.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific resource (fatty acid profile of one TACO food) with the exact nutrient classes covered and the unit basis. It is unmistakable against siblings like get_amino_acids or get_nutrients, which cover different nutrient domains.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Clear context: one food, looked up by id, with an explicit caveat that only 423 of 597 foods have the profile and that others return available:false. It does not explicitly route the agent to an alternative tool for foods lacking data, but the coverage caveat is the decision-relevant guidance.

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

Deploy Server