food_detail

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

With no annotations, the description carries the whole burden, and it discloses only that authentication is required. It says nothing about what is returned, whether the call is read-only, error behavior, or rate limits, so an agent is left guessing on most behavioral traits.

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 short but that brevity is under-specification rather than economy: one parenthetical fragment cannot front-load the information an agent needs. It is not padded, but it earns little.

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 annotations, no output schema, one undocumented parameter, and no explanation of how an order is identified, the description is far too thin for a retrieval tool. An agent cannot confidently construct the call from this definition.

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?

The single token parameter has 0% schema description coverage. "needs login" hints that token is an auth credential, which is a partial clarification, but there is still no explanation of how the target order is referenced or whether token is required (the schema marks it optional).

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?

"Order detail" is a bare noun phrase that largely restates the tool name and does not specify whether it returns one order or a list, or how the order is identified. It only vaguely distinguishes itself from the many food_* siblings such as food_order_new or food_menu.

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?

"needs login" states a prerequisite but gives no when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, and never points to an alternative sibling. Nothing tells the agent when this is the right call versus food_order_new or food_basket_*.

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