calculate_cat_food

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

No annotations are present, so the description must bear full burden. It discloses the return format ({kcal_per_day}) but does not state whether the operation is read-only, has side effects, or any error conditions. For a calculator, this is minimal.

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?

Two sentences: one for purpose/inputs, one for output and related tools. No redundancy, efficient.

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 calculator with three parameters and no annotations, the description covers the essential inputs and output. However, it lacks details on output format (e.g., is it a number?), possible errors, or assumptions. Adequate but could be more thorough.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must compensate. It mentions weight, age, and lifestyle, mapping to weight_kg, age, and indoor. However, it does not explain the enum values (kitten/adult/senior) or the meaning of the indoor boolean beyond 'lifestyle'. Adds some value but not comprehensive.

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 calculates daily cat food quantity based on weight, age, and lifestyle, and specifies the output as kcal_per_day. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like calculate_dog_food or calculate_pet_food_portion, relying on the name for distinction.

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 mentions 'See list_bundles for related animaux calculators', which implies alternatives exist but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus others. No context on prerequisites or exclusions is given.

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