list_plans

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

No annotations exist, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It only states the action without mentioning side effects, permissions, or data limitations. 'Average meal ratings' is mentioned but unexplained, and there is no indication of read-only nature or output details.

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, concise sentence that immediately conveys the main action. However, it is slightly under-specified for the parameter count, but the conciseness itself is effective.

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 4 parameters, no output schema, and no sibling differentiation, the description is incomplete. It does not cover filtering, limits, or return structure, leaving significant gaps for an AI agent to use correctly.

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 fails to explain any parameters beyond implying 'profile_id'. The boolean fields 'favorites_only' and 'labelled_only', and 'limit' are not described, providing no additional meaning over their names and types.

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 lists persisted plans for a profile with average meal ratings, using a specific verb and resource. However, it doesn't distinguish from siblings like 'get_meal_plan' which retrieves a single plan, leaving slight ambiguity for an AI agent.

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 'get_meal_plan' for a single plan or 'generate_meal_plan' for creation. The description lacks any contextual usage hints.

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