Nutriscan MCP connector

meal_log_list

Read-only

List local meal log entries newest first, optionally filtered by UTC date and capped by a limit, so you can review recent meals without external food database calls.

Instructions

List entries in the local meal log, newest first. Optional UTC date (YYYY-MM-DD) and limit. Does not call Open Food Facts or USDA.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "meal_log_list"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`date`	No	Only entries on this UTC date (YYYY-MM-DD). Omit to list the newest entries across days.
`limit`	No	Maximum entries (default 50, max 200).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Nov 5, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile and the 'no external calls' claim are largely redundant with structured data. The description does add genuinely new behavior in the ordering guarantee ('newest first') and the confirmed local-only data source, but says nothing about pagination, result caps beyond the parameter, or what an entry contains.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the resource and ordering, then the parameters, then the disambiguating scope note. Nothing is padding and no sentence could be removed without losing information.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a two-optional-parameter read tool with full annotation coverage and no output schema, the definition covers purpose, ordering, scope and filtering adequately. The one gap is that with no output schema the description never indicates the shape of a returned log entry, which matters for an agent planning to consume the results.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100% and the schema already documents the YYYY-MM-DD format, the omit-to-list-all behavior, and the default of 50 with a maximum of 200. The description only restates the same two parameters, adding no syntax or format meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description gives a concrete verb and resource ('List entries in the local meal log') plus the sort order ('newest first'), and the closing sentence separates it from the remote-lookup siblings (usda_food_search, product_search) by stating no external calls are made. It stops short of naming the closest sibling, meal_log_day_total, so an agent must still infer that the aggregate is a different tool.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Usage is only implied: the date parameter's 'omit to list the newest entries across days' behavior hints at the broad-recent-list case, and 'local meal log' hints it is for entries already recorded. There is no explicit when-to-use versus meal_log_day_total or nutrients_per_serving, and no stated prerequisites.

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

Deploy Server