fitbit_get_food_log

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses caching (returns from cache, auto-syncs if stale), the live parameter's API call cost, and that days without logging are omitted.

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 concise with a clear structure: purpose, behavior, parameter details, and return value. Every sentence adds value.

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 output schema exists and parameters are well explained, the description provides complete context: caching, live mode, date formats, return structure, and omission of empty days.

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?

Despite 0% schema description coverage, the description explains date formats, defaults, and the live parameter's behavior, adding significant meaning beyond the 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 it retrieves daily food and water log summaries, specifying calories and water intake. It distinguishes itself from siblings like fitbit_get_activity and fitbit_get_sleep.

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?

It mentions that data is only populated if the user logs food/water, and explains the caching behavior and live parameter. While it doesn't explicitly compare to siblings, the context is clear.

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