list_nutrients

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It states what is listed but does not disclose return format, pagination, or side effects. For a simple listing operation, this is adequate but minimal; it lacks explicit read-only confirmation.

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, compact sentence in Chinese that directly communicates the tool's function without unnecessary words. It is front-loaded with the action verb '列出'.

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?

With no output schema, the description covers the core return content (field names, Chinese/English names, units). It lacks detail on output structure or formatting but is sufficient for a parameterless listing tool with low complexity.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description correctly focuses on return content rather than parameter syntax, which is appropriate given the absence of inputs.

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 all queryable nutrient field names, Chinese/English names, and units. It uses a specific verb (列出) and resource, making it distinct from sibling tools that search foods or get nutrition data.

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 purpose implies using this tool to discover available nutrient fields before querying, but it does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives like filter_by_nutrient or get_nutrition. No exclusions or alternative references are provided.

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