bulk_delete_recipes

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full disclosure burden for a destructive bulk operation. It reveals only the route and HTTP method (POST .../bulk-actions/delete); it says nothing about irreversibility, whether deletion is soft or hard, permission requirements, or failure semantics when some IDs are invalid.

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?

The name and endpoint are front-loaded, but the body is dominated by a long keyword dump that repeats the tool name and adds irrelevant create/add/new verbs. The useful content could fit in one sentence, so most of the text does not earn its place.

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 destructive bulk mutation with no annotations, no output schema, and an undocumented parameter, the description should at minimum cover the deletion target format and consequences. Instead it stops at the route and keyword padding, leaving the agent without enough to invoke it confidently.

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 description coverage is 0% for the single required body parameter containing a 'recipes' array, so the description must compensate and does not. The word 'bulk' weakly implies multiple records per call, but nothing clarifies whether the array holds IDs, slugs, or names, nor any size limit.

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?

The opening states a specific verb+resource ('Bulk Delete Recipes ... Delete recipe'), so the core action is identifiable. However, there is no differentiation from close siblings such as recipe_crud_delete_one, delete_many, or shared_recipes_delete_one, and the keyword block injects contradictory verbs ('create recipe, add recipe, new recipe, make recipe'), which muddies rather than sharpens the purpose.

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?

No when-to-use guidance is given: nothing says to prefer this over recipe_crud_delete_one for single deletes or delete_many for other resources, nor any prerequisite (e.g., confirmation, ownership checks). The keyword list is not usage guidance, so the agent gets no routing information.

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