ask.recipes

Save a recipe

save_recipe

DestructiveIdempotent

Save a recipe to one of the user's cookbooks, for "save that one", "keep this", "put it in my BBQ cookbook". Pass cookbook when the user names one; it is created on first use. Without one the recipe goes to the default cookbook. A recipe can sit in several cookbooks; saving it again to the same one only updates the note.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`id`	Yes	recipe id to save
`note`	No	the user's own note on this recipe in this cookbook, e.g. 'half the chilli, kids loved it'
`cookbook`	No	cookbook to save into, by name, e.g. 'Stews' or 'Christmas'; created when it does not exist yet; leave empty for the default cookbook

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	Yes
`saved`	Yes
`cookbook`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedOct 25, 2026
- removedOutput schema / additionalProperties
```
Removed value: -false
```

Changed4 schema fields changedOct 24, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / cookbook

Added value: +{
+  "description": "cookbook to save into, by name, e.g. 'Stews' or 'Christmas'; created when it does not exist yet; leave empty for the default cookbook",
+  "type": "string"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / note

Added value: +{
+  "description": "the user's own note on this recipe in this cookbook, e.g. 'half the chilli, kids loved it'",
+  "type": "string"
+}

addedOutput schema / properties / cookbook
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
```

changedOutput schema / required

Previous value: -[
-  "saved",
-  "id"
-]New value: +[
+  "saved",
+  "id",
+  "cookbook"
+]

First observedOct 15, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Goes beyond the annotations by disclosing the create-on-first-use side effect for cookbooks, the default-cookbook fallback, that a recipe may live in several cookbooks, and that a repeat save only updates the note. That last point softens the destructiveHint=true annotation but does not contradict it outright, since overwriting a note is still a mutation.

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?

Front-loaded with the core action, then defaults, then edge-case semantics. The quoted utterance examples are mildly verbose but earn their place as routing cues.

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?

An output schema exists and annotations cover the safety profile, so the description only needs to cover side effects and defaults, which it does. It leaves unstated what happens to an existing note when note is omitted on a re-save.

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?

Schema coverage is 100% and already documents all three parameters, so the baseline is 3; the description still adds real meaning by clarifying that the note is scoped per cookbook and is what gets replaced on a repeated save, and by tying cookbook names to auto-creation.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Save a recipe to one of the user's cookbooks') plus the scope of the target container, which cleanly separates it from siblings like unsave_recipe, list_saved, and create_cookbook.

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?

Gives concrete user-utterance triggers ('save that one', 'put it in my BBQ cookbook') and a rule for when to pass cookbook versus omit it. It does not explicitly name an alternative tool or a when-not-to-use case, so it stops short of a 5.

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

All ask.recipes tools Inspect

Try in Browser

Context All Your Agents Can ShareAgents share what they learn, hand off work, and hold it when you switch models. Start with 5 GB free.fulcradynamics.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.