calculate_daily_protein

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It only states that the tool calculates and returns values, with no disclosure of behavioral traits like safety, side effects, or required permissions. The return format is given, but the description lacks depth for a mutation-free calculator.

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 efficiently convey purpose, parameters, and return format. Every clause serves a purpose. No wasted words.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity and presence of an output schema, the description adequately covers the core function and output structure. It could mention precision or assumptions but is complete enough for a basic calculator.

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 coverage is 100% and parameters already have descriptions. The description adds minimal extra meaning by mentioning 'weight and fitness goal' but does not elaborate on the enum options or constraints beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the description adds value but does not significantly surpass schema information.

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 protein intake based on weight and fitness goal, with a specific return shape. The verb 'calculate' and resource 'daily protein intake' are precise, and the description distinguishes it from other calculator tools by naming the specific domain.

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 implies when to use (when needing protein recommendation) but does not explicitly state when not to use or provide alternatives. It mentions list_bundles for related calculators, but this is a general reference rather than a direct alternative specification.

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