delete_recipe_tag

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does disclose real behavioral detail: the tag is removed from the database and detached from any recipes containing it, with no impact to the recipes themselves. It omits whether deletion is irreversible, what permissions are required, and what the response returns, which matters for a destructive operation.

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 core message is front-loaded, but the header repeats the tool name and category, and the trailing 'Keywords:' block is a long keyword-stuffing list that adds no selection value. Roughly half the text is noise.

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?

No output schema exists, and since this is a one-parameter destructive tool, the description is minimally adequate: it explains the cascade effect on recipes. It still leaves irreversibility, auth requirements, and error behavior (not-found tag) unstated.

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 item_id parameter, and the description adds almost nothing beyond the endpoint path showing {item_id}. It never explains that item_id is the tag's UUID, how to obtain it, or what happens on an unknown ID.

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 ('Delete a recipe tag', 'Removes a recipe tag from the database') and even includes the endpoint. However, it does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tag operations such as organizer_tags_update_one or bulk tag tools, so an agent must infer the boundary.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance or reference to alternatives (e.g., bulk operations, organizer_tags_get_all for discovering tag IDs first). The only conditional statement is about side effects ('does not impact a recipe'), not about when this tool is the right choice.

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