Bryti

Use what is at home

adapt_dinner_ingredient

DestructiveIdempotent

Make one evening's dinner with something the household has instead of an ingredient, e.g. milk instead of cream. Only that evening changes, and the replaced ingredient leaves the shopping list; the recipe in the library stays as it is.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "date": "<date>",
      "useFood": "<useFood>",
      "insteadOfFood": "<insteadOfFood>"
    },
    "name": "adapt_dinner_ingredient"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`date`	Yes	The dinner date, ISO date.
`useFood`	Yes	What to use — the food the household already has, e.g. «melk».
`insteadOfFood`	Yes	The ingredient in that dinner it replaces, e.g. «fløte».

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 7, 2026

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

This is where the description earns its keep: with destructiveHint=true, an agent might hesitate, but the text scopes the mutation precisely — only that evening changes, the replaced ingredient drops off the shopping list, and the library recipe is untouched. It does not say what happens if the ingredient is not actually part of that dinner, nor does it mention the idempotent behavior declared in annotations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two tightly written sentences, front-loaded with the action and followed by the scope of effects. The example slightly duplicates the schema's own examples, but it is short enough that no sentence feels wasted.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a three-parameter mutation with no output schema, the description covers the essential contract: what changes, what does not, and one side effect on the shopping list. Missing only error/precondition behavior and whether the returned state is the updated dinner.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100% and each parameter already carries an example, so the baseline is 3. The description's 'milk instead of cream' reinforces the useFood-vs-insteadOfFood direction, which is genuinely useful, but adds no format or constraint detail beyond the schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a specific verb and resource: substituting an ingredient in one evening's dinner with something the household already has, with a concrete example (milk for cream). It implicitly separates itself from whole-dinner tools like replace_dinner, but never names that sibling, so the distinction must be inferred.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The scenario is clear (an ingredient is missing but an equivalent is at home), which implies when to reach for this over add_shopping_item or replace_dinner. However, no explicit alternatives or exclusions are given, and prerequisites such as an existing planned dinner for that date are only hinted at by 'that dinner'.

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

All Bryti tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?