Skip to main content
Glama

recipes

by io.github.pipeworx-io

Random Meal

random_meal
Read-onlyIdempotent

Get a random meal recipe with full ingredients and cooking instructions. Use when you need recipe inspiration without a specific search.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesTheMealDB meal ID
areaYesCuisine area/region (e.g., Italian, Indian)
nameYesMeal name
tagsYesList of meal tags/keywords
categoryYesMeal category (e.g., dessert, seafood)
source_urlYesSource website URL
ingredientsYesList of ingredients with measurements
youtube_urlYesYouTube video URL for recipe
instructionsYesStep-by-step cooking instructions
thumbnail_urlYesURL to meal thumbnail image

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "area": {
+      "description": "Cuisine area/region (e.g., Italian, Indian)",
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "category": {
+      "description": "Meal category (e.g., dessert, seafood)",
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "id": {
+      "description": "TheMealDB meal ID",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "ingredients": {
+      "description": "List of ingredients with measurements",
+      "items": {
+        "properties": {
+          "ingredient": {
+            "description": "Ingredient name",
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "measure": {
+            "description": "Measurement quantity and unit",
+            "type": "string"
+          }
+        },
+        "required": [
+          "ingredient",
+          "measure"
+        ],
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "instructions": {
+      "description": "Step-by-step cooking instructions",
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "name": {
+      "description": "Meal name",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "source_url": {
+      "description": "Source website URL",
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "tags": {
+      "description": "List of meal tags/keywords",
+      "items": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "thumbnail_url": {
+      "description": "URL to meal thumbnail image",
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "youtube_url": {
+      "description": "YouTube video URL for recipe",
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "id",
+    "name",
+    "category",
+    "area",
+    "instructions",
+    "thumbnail_url",
+    "youtube_url",
+    "source_url",
+    "tags",
+    "ingredients"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / examples
      Added value: +[
+  {}
+]
  3. First observed

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds context about the output content ('full ingredients and cooking instructions'), which is useful beyond the annotations. No contradiction.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is concise—two sentences, front-loaded with the core function, followed by a clear usage instruction. Every word earns its place with no redundancy.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Given no parameters, an output schema, and a clear description of the result ('random meal recipe with full ingredients and cooking instructions'), the description is complete. It also differentiates from meal-related sibling tools.

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

Parameters4/5

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

The tool has zero parameters, and schema coverage is 100% (trivially). The description appropriately focuses on the output instead of parameters, matching the baseline for no-param tools.

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

Purpose5/5

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

The description clearly states the tool's function: 'Get a random meal recipe with full ingredients and cooking instructions.' The specific verb 'Get' and resource 'random meal recipe' with details on contents distinguishes it from sibling tools like search_meals and get_meal.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description provides explicit when-to-use guidance: 'Use when you need recipe inspiration without a specific search.' This implies when not to use it (when a specific search is needed), though it does not name alternative sibling tools directly.

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

All recipes toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool has a highly specific purpose with detailed descriptions, making them easily distinguishable. Overlaps are minimal; for instance, Pipeworx and Polymarket tools have distinct roles within their domains.

Naming Consistency4/5

Most tools follow a consistent snake_case pattern (e.g., ask_pipeworx, compare_entities), but a few single-word names (e.g., forget, recall) deviate slightly, causing minor inconsistency.

Tool Count2/5

The server is named 'recipes' but contains only 4 recipe-related tools out of 34. The majority cover unrelated domains like finance, betting, and data queries, making the scope overly broad and misaligned with the server name.

Completeness2/5

For the 'recipes' domain, essential CRUD operations and features like meal planning are missing. While the general tool set is extensive, it lacks critical recipe-related functionality, leaving significant gaps for the intended purpose.

Resources