recipe_timeline_update_one

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full burden. It does add one genuinely useful behavioral fact — this is a full replacement, so unspecified fields are effectively reset — but says nothing about permissions, behavior on a nonexistent item_id, or idempotency.

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 first sentence is well-structured and front-loaded, but roughly half the text is a redundant keyword block ('recipe_timeline_update_one, recipe timeline update one, ... update, replace, edit, modify, save, write, put, mealie') that adds tokens without adding meaning for an agent.

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 write tool with no annotations, no output schema, and 0% parameter coverage, the description should at minimum explain the required body fields and mutation semantics. It gives only the HTTP verb and route, leaving the agent to infer the payload shape from the raw JSON schema.

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% and neither the schema nor the description explains the parameters. The path placeholder {item_id} only implies that identifier exists; the required body field 'subject', 'image' enum, and 'eventMessage' are never explained in the description.

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 ('Update One — Recipe: Timeline. Replace (full update) event') plus the underlying route PUT /api/recipes/timeline/events/{item_id}. 'Replace (full update)' usefully distinguishes it from a partial-update/patch sibling, though no sibling is named explicitly and the noisy keyword tail dilutes the message.

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 guidance on when to use this versus recipe_timeline_create_one, recipe_timeline_delete_one, or update_event_image, and no mention of prerequisites or when a full replace is preferable to a targeted edit. The only extra content is a keyword list, which is not usage guidance.

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