mfp_delete_meal

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, readOnlyHint=false, and idempotentHint=true, so the description adds limited behavioral context beyond confirming it deletes a saved meal by ID. The '[stable]' tag adds a small amount of contract stability context, but no detail about cascading effects, permissions, or irreversibility.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler or redundant words. It communicates the action, resource, and identifier method efficiently.

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?

For a simple, one-required-parameter delete tool, the description plus annotations and schema are largely sufficient. The main missing piece is explicit usage guidance or prerequisites, but the schema's meal_id description and the tool name cover most operational needs.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate, but it only mentions deleting 'by id' and says nothing about the response_format parameter. The schema itself supplies the meal_id source, but the description does not explain either parameter's role or default behavior.

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 states a specific action and resource: 'Delete a saved Meal by id.' This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools that list, create, log, or rename meals. The verb and object are unambiguous.

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 is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives, or on prerequisites such as obtaining the meal_id via mfp_list_meals. The description simply states what the tool does, leaving the agent to infer applicability.

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