get_recipe

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility for disclosing behavioral traits. The description only shows the HTTP path, implying a GET request (read-only) but does not explicitly state that it is non-destructive, what data is returned, or whether authentication is required. Key behavioral context is missing.

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 description is extremely short (two lines) but lacks essential information. Under-specification is not conciseness; every word should earn its place. Here, the description is minimal but ineffective, missing critical details for tool selection and use.

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?

Given the presence of many sibling tools (e.g., get_recipe_asset, get_recipe_comments, recipe_crud_get_one) and no output schema or annotations, the description is incomplete. It does not state the return value, scope, or how this tool relates to others. The agent lacks sufficient information to choose this tool 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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must compensate. The path mentions group_slug and recipe_slug but does not explain their meaning, format, or how to obtain them. The schema titles 'Group Slug' and 'Recipe Slug' are equally minimal. The description adds no value beyond the property names.

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 description states 'Get Recipe' and provides the HTTP path, indicating it fetches a recipe. However, it does not differentiate itself from sibling tools like get_recipe_asset, get_recipe_as_format, or recipe_crud_get_one, which also retrieve recipe-related data. The purpose is clear but lacks specificity to distinguish from similar tools.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_shared_recipe, explore_recipes_get_all, or get_recipe_comments. The description does not mention prerequisites, context, or scenarios where this tool is appropriate.

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