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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, non-destructive, closed-world), so the description's added value is the behavioral detail: only published recipes are retrievable, and the payload is Markdown prose rather than structured data. It stops short of describing failure behavior for unknown or unpublished slugs.

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?

One sentence, zero waste, front-loaded with the use case followed by the return payload. Every clause adds information.

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?

With no output schema, the description correctly takes on the burden of describing the return contents and format (Markdown). Minor gap: no mention of what happens when the slug is unknown or the recipe is unpublished.

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?

Single parameter with 100% schema coverage; the schema already says the slug comes from find_recipes, and the description only restates that origin. Baseline 3 applies since the schema does the work.

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 ('open one published recipe') and enumerates exactly what the returned Markdown contains (goal, tools, guardrails, prompts, expected output, watch-outs). The phrase 'from find_recipes' positions it downstream of that sibling, though it does not explicitly distinguish itself from get_recipe_template.

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?

'Use to open one published recipe from find_recipes' conveys the intended workflow (find first, then fetch by slug). It gives clear usage context but no explicit when-not or routing rule versus get_recipe_template.

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