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

Adds substantial context beyond the annotations: the page is public and search-engine indexed, it reflects current recipe state including Sous Chef edits, re-sharing mutates the same link rather than minting a new one, and a signed-in account is required. The re-share behavior concretely explains the idempotentHint and the public indexing explains openWorldHint, so the description enriches rather than repeats the structured data.

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?

Three sentences, each earning its place: action and return value first, then the gating condition, then the risk/auth profile. No filler and nothing buried.

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?

An output schema exists, yet the description still confirms the URL is returned. For a single-parameter mutation with public side effects, the auth requirement, permanence/idempotency of the link, and visibility of the content are all disclosed — everything an agent needs before calling.

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 0% for the single recipeId parameter, so the description must carry the meaning. It establishes that the argument identifies a recipe, but never says where the ID comes from (e.g. from list_my_recipes or get_recipe) or whether a slug/URL is acceptable, leaving the only real gap in an otherwise strong definition.

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 ("Creates (or refreshes) a public Sous Chef link for a recipe") plus the return value (the URL). The agent can distinguish this from read-only siblings like get_recipe or display_recipe purely from the description.

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?

"Only call when the user explicitly asks to share a recipe" is an explicit when-to-use constraint with a clear exclusion, which is stronger than most. It does not name an alternative sibling (e.g. display_recipe for non-public viewing), so the routing guidance is slightly incomplete.

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