food_get_product

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It only states the action without any mention of output format, error handling, rate limits, or data freshness. This is a significant gap.

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?

A single sentence with no extraneous words. Every word is necessary and clear.

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?

Given the lack of output schema, the description should hint at typical return fields (e.g., product name, brand). It does not, leaving the agent uncertain about what data will be returned. The description is too brief for a tool that is the only way to get a product by barcode.

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 schema has 0% coverage (no description for 'barcode'). The description adds that the tool retrieves by barcode, clarifying the parameter's purpose. However, it does not specify the expected format or any constraints, so it provides only minimal added value.

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 verb 'get', the resource 'food product', the source 'Open Food Facts', and the identifier 'barcode'. This distinguishes it from siblings like 'food_search' (which searches without a specific barcode) and 'food_by_category' (which gets by category).

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention any conditions or exclusions, nor does it reference siblings like food_search or food_by_category.

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