get_daily_summary

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions the default date behavior but does not disclose any other behavioral traits like idempotency, authentication requirements, or side effects. It is a read operation, but without annotations, the description offers minimal transparency beyond the obvious.

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 two sentences plus a parameter block, with no redundant information. It front-loads the purpose and immediately follows with parameter details. Every sentence adds value.

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 simple tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description covers the key return elements (calories, macros, water, goals) and parameter format. It lacks examples or structure of the output, but is sufficient for basic usage.

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%, so the description must compensate. It provides format ('YYYY-MM-DD'), default behavior ('defaults to today'), and type (date). This adds meaningful value beyond the schema's type definitions.

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 description clearly states the tool provides a daily nutrition overview including calories, macros, water, and goals. It uses specific verbs ('Get') and resource ('daily nutrition overview'), and distinguishes from siblings like get_daily_macros and get_water_intake by implying a combined view.

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?

The description lists what the tool returns but provides no guidance on when to use it over siblings (e.g., get_daily_macros for detailed macros, get_date_range_summary for multiple days). No when-not-to-use or alternative suggestions.

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