get_recipe_as_format

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the burden. It mentions that template type is set automatically and templates must have unique names, but it does not disclose the read-only nature (GET request), auth requirements, rate limits, or what happens on error. Additional behavioral context is minimal.

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 short but contains a redundancy ('to use to use') and uses markdown headers. It is front-loaded with the tool title and endpoint, but could be more concise and professional. The structure is adequate though flawed.

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 no output schema, the description should indicate what the tool returns (e.g., the exported recipe file). It references another endpoint for available templates, but does not explain the return value or pagination/format. The description is incomplete for an agent to invoke correctly without additional knowledge.

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%, so the description should compensate. It explains template_name (automatic type assignment, uniqueness requirement) but does not explain the slug parameter beyond its title. This leaves one required parameter undocumented in terms of usage, format, or examples.

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 names the tool 'Get Recipe As Format' and states the endpoint, implying it exports a recipe in a specific format. However, it doesn't clearly state that it retrieves an exported file or data, and the typo 'to use to use' reduces clarity. It distinguishes from siblings like bulk_export_recipes and get_recipe, but the purpose is somewhat vague.

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?

The description mentions seeing available names and formats in another endpoint, hinting at a prerequisite, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives (e.g., get_recipe for details, bulk_export_recipes for multiple recipes). There is no guidance on context or when not to use it.

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