get_macro_targets

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

Annotations declare readOnly, non-destructive, idempotent. The description adds value by detailing the return content (weekly schedule and templates). No contradictions. Could mention if the data is cached, but not necessary.

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?

Two sentences, with the first stating the main purpose and the second detailing return content. No extraneous text. Efficient and well-structured.

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 no parameters, comprehensive annotations, and the presence of an output schema (not shown but noted in context), the description sufficiently explains the tool's behavior and return values for a read-only getter.

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?

No parameters exist, so schema coverage is 100%. The description does not need to add parameter info. Baseline of 4 is appropriate.

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 it retrieves current macro targets, specifically weekly schedule and templates. It uses a specific verb 'Get' and resource 'macro targets', and the context distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'get_daily_nutrition' which deal with actual intake.

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 explicit guidance on when to use versus alternatives, but the purpose is clear and the tool is simple with no parameters. The description implies it's for retrieving target configuration, but it doesn't provide exclusions or alternatives.

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