create_meal_plan_entry

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It conveys that the action is additive and states the recipe_slug OR title/note choice, but it does not disclose preconditions such as whether recipe_slug must exist, duplicate/overwrite behavior, or any side effects beyond creation.

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 purpose sentence followed by a tight Args list. There is no filler, and every parameter line adds meaningful usage detail.

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?

All five parameters are documented and the behavior of recipe_slug versus title/note is clarified. An output schema exists, so return-value description is unnecessary. Minor gaps such as what happens if both recipe_slug and title/note are supplied prevent a perfect score.

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. It does so thoroughly: it defines the date format, lists acceptable entry_type values, and explains when to use recipe_slug versus title/note, going well beyond the raw JSON 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 lead sentence states exactly what the tool does: 'Add a meal plan entry for a specific date.' This is a specific verb+resource description that distinguishes it from sibling tools like delete_meal_plan_entry and get_meal_plans.

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 description gives clear context for when to use the tool: whenever adding a meal plan entry for a date. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusion criteria (e.g., use delete_meal_plan_entry to remove an entry), so it stops short of the top score.

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