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

Annotations already flag destructiveHint and idempotentHint, so the safety profile is known; the description adds non-obvious guardrails the annotations cannot express — built-in recipes are protected and planned dinners block deletion until the day is otherwise covered. It does not say whether deletion is recoverable or what happens to existing meal events and shopping items referencing the recipe.

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 tight sentences, front-loaded with the action and scope, with no filler. The trailing clause 'stays until that day has another dinner' is slightly oblique phrasing that takes a second read.

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 one-parameter destructive tool with no output schema, the description covers the main blockers but leaves open what is removed alongside the recipe (planned dinners, shopping list entries) and whether the agent should confirm first. Adequate but with clear gaps for a destructive operation.

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 already documents 'Exact title of the recipe to delete.' The description's 'by its title' restates that, adding only the implicit constraint that the title must belong to a household-owned recipe. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Delete one of the household's own recipes') plus the lookup key ('by its title'), and the 'household's own' qualifier separates it from built-in recipes and from siblings like edit_recipe or save_recipe.

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?

Gives conditions under which the call will fail (built-in recipes, recipes planned for an upcoming day), which is useful selection context, but never names an alternative action such as edit_recipe for renaming or what to do when a delete is blocked. Usage is implied rather than routed.

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