get_recipe_img

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

No annotations provided, so description fills some gaps. It discloses the proxied nature and that it returns a static image, but lacks details on auth, idempotency, or side effects.

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 fairly concise with three sentences, but the first line duplicates the name and the structure could be improved by separating purpose from deployment note.

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 merely says 'returns the static image' without specifying format, error conditions, or behavior when parameters are invalid, leaving gaps for a complete tool understanding.

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 only mentions 'recipe id' but fails to explain the file_name enum values or their meaning, leaving the user to infer image size options.

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 clearly states it gets a recipe image using recipe_id and file_name, and distinguishes from siblings like get_recipe and get_recipe_asset. The HTTP path and proxy note add specificity.

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 implies use for direct image access and warns it should not hit API in production, but does not explicitly compare to alternatives like get_recipe_asset or when to use different image sizes.

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