Retrieve a vendor's menu items using location coordinates and a vendor code. Fetch item details for a specific restaurant within SnappFood operations.
Vendor menu
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| lat | No | ||
| code | No | ||
| long | No | ||
| token | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, and it discloses nothing: not whether this is a read or write, not auth requirements (a token parameter is present), not rate limits, not return format.
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 words are not concise but under-specified; there is nothing to front-load and no useful information is conveyed.
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?
A four-parameter tool with no annotations, no output schema, and no parameter documentation is completely inadequately described. Nothing an agent needs in order to invoke it correctly is present.
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?
Four parameters (lat, code, long, token) with 0% schema description coverage, and the description adds no meaning for any of them. The likely meaning of lat/long/code/token must be entirely guessed.
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?
"Vendor menu" is a bare noun phrase that restates the tool name (food_menu) rather than stating an action. It hints at the resource (a vendor's menu) but gives no verb, scope, or way to distinguish it from siblings like food_vendors, food_vendor, or food_detail.
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?
There is no guidance on when to use this tool, no prerequisites, and no mention of any alternative among the many sibling tools. An agent has nothing to route on.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.