add_food_entry

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false. The description adds behavioral details like case-insensitivity for diary_group and default values, but does not elaborate on side effects beyond what is implied by 'add.' No contradiction with annotations.

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 appropriately sized: a single sentence for purpose, followed by a usage hint, then a clear bullet list of parameters. Every sentence provides value, and the structure is front-loaded with the main 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?

Given the tool has 6 parameters, annotations, and an output schema, the description covers all necessary context: purpose, prerequisite tools, parameter explanations, and defaults. The output schema exists, so return values are not needed in the description.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description fully compensates by explaining each parameter: food_id from search_foods, measure_id from get_food_details, grams as weight, date format, translation_id default 0, and diary_group possible values. This adds substantial meaning beyond the raw schema.

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 'Add a food entry to the Cronometer diary,' using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes the tool from siblings like search_foods and remove_food_entry, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 explicitly advises using search_foods and get_food_details as prerequisites, providing clear context and guidance on when to use this tool. It also explains default behaviors for parameters.

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