food_rules

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

With no annotations at all, the description carries the full behavioral burden and fails it. Beyond the parenthetical 'needs login' (vaguely implying authentication), it discloses nothing about side effects, output, or constraints for a tool with an ambiguous name.

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 single fragment is short but under-specified rather than concise; it front-loads an ambiguous noun phrase with no verb, so it does not communicate the action.

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 2-param, no-annotation, no-output-schema tool, the description provides almost nothing: no parameter meaning, no behavior, no usage context. An agent cannot reliably invoke this from the definition alone.

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 0% and the two params 'code' and 'token' are completely undocumented. The description does not mention what 'code' (vendor code? basket code?) or 'token' (auth token?) mean, leaving the agent to guess.

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 name 'food_rules' and title-less description 'Basket rules for vendor (needs login)' only vaguely gesture at retrieving rules related to a basket/vendor. It does not state a specific verb or what is actually returned, and the sibling set (food_basket_create, food_basket_update, etc.) already covers basket mutation, so it is unclear what distinct operation this represents.

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, no alternative named, and no distinction from siblings like food_basket_create/update. The only hint is '(needs login)', which is a precondition rather than usage guidance.

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