recipe_timeline_get_all

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, yet it only names the HTTP verb/path. The 'read-only' token appears in the keyword dump rather than as an actual behavioral statement, and it says nothing about pagination behavior, default ordering (desc), or the meaning of the ordering controls that clearly affect results.

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 useful content is a single terse line, and the bulk of the description is a large block of redundant keyword synonyms (list/get/search/find/browse/fetch/read event...). This stuffing wastes context and does not front-load anything beyond the endpoint path.

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 7-parameter list tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description should at least explain the paging/ordering/filter parameters and the shape of returned events. It provides none of that, leaving the agent unable to use the tool correctly beyond the defaults.

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?

Seven parameters (page, perPage, orderBy, orderDirection, queryFilter, paginationSeed, orderByNullPosition) have 0% schema description coverage, and the description adds no explanation of any of them. Syntax and accepted formats for orderBy/queryFilter are left entirely undocumented.

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 header 'Get All — Recipe: Timeline. List events.' gives a recognizable verb+resource (list recipe timeline events) and the endpoint path confirms it is a collection GET. However, it does nothing to separate this from look-alike siblings such as recipe_timeline_get_one or households_event_notifications_get_all, and the generic 'Get All —' template carries little semantic weight.

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 statement of when to use this tool versus recipe_timeline_get_one or the other event-list endpoints. 'List events' implies a read/list purpose, but no conditions, prerequisites, or alternatives are given, so the agent must infer everything from the name.

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