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

There are no annotations, so description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It implies a read-only listing operation but says nothing about default limits, pagination behavior, how filters combine, whether results are sorted, or what transactions occur. This is thin for a 7-parameter list tool.

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 one tight, front-loaded sentence with no redundancy. It could carry more information, but as far as concision and structure go, every word earns its place.

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 large sibling namespace and 7 undocumented optional filters, the description does not give enough context for an agent to reliably choose it or construct a correct call. The output schema helps with return shape, but the selection and filtering semantics are left unexplained.

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?

The input schema has 7 parameters with 0% description coverage, and the description only says 'metadata filtering' without explaining tags, agent, facets, section, severity, min_quality, or limit. Some names are self-explanatory, but facets and severity especially need semantics that neither the description nor schema provide.

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 action ('List') and resource ('recipes'), and 'with optional metadata filtering' signals that this is a queryable list endpoint. It does not fully distinguish it from sibling tools like recipes_search or recipes_get, but the basic purpose is 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 about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as recipes_search, recipes_get, or recipes_playbooks_list. The phrase 'List recipes' implies enumeration, but there are no explicit conditions, exclusions, or prerequisites.

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