food_profile

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it only discloses a login requirement. It omits whether this is a read or write operation, what data is returned, and what the token represents or how to obtain it.

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 under-specified rather than concise; there is no front-loaded statement of what the tool does. Brevity here reflects missing content, not efficient editing.

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 tool requiring an undocumented auth token with no output schema to explain the return, the description leaves nearly everything unresolved. The login hint is the only completeness signal, and it is not actionable on its own.

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 parameter "token" has 0% schema description coverage, and the description compensates with nothing beyond the vague "needs login" hint. An agent cannot tell from either source how the token should be sourced or formatted.

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?

"Food profile" merely restates the tool name without a verb or resource detail; it never says whether it fetches or edits the profile. The parenthetical "(needs login)" adds a prerequisite but no purpose specificity, and it does nothing to distinguish it from food_detail or food_vendors.

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 when-to-use guidance and no named alternative, even though siblings like food_detail and the food_login_* family are plausible substitutes or prerequisites. "Needs login" hints at a precondition but does not tell the agent when to pick this tool over others.

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