meal_search

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'by name' but does not specify case sensitivity, partial matching, pagination, rate limits, or the nature of results (e.g., full recipe vs. list of IDs).

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 a single sentence that gets straight to the point. It is not verbose, but could include more details without losing conciseness.

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 simple schema and lack of output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not explain the nature of results (e.g., full recipe details or just names), limits, or how it complements the sibling meal tools.

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 one parameter 'query' with 0% description coverage. The description adds that it searches by 'name,' giving basic context for the query parameter. However, it does not elaborate on format or special characters, so it is minimally helpful.

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 'Search for meals/recipes by name,' which is a specific verb-resource pair. It distinguishes from sibling tools like meal_filter_by_category or meal_random, which have different search criteria.

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 such as meal_filter_by_area or meal_filter_by_ingredient. The description simply states what it does, without providing context about which parameter to use or when to prefer this tool.

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