recipes_foods_get_all

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but only states 'list' and 'read-only' (in keywords). It doesn't disclose pagination behavior, default page size, sort order default (desc), or what happens with search/query filters.

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 actual description is one short sentence, but the massive keyword list adds noise and length without adding meaning. It's not concise overall.

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 tool with 8 parameters, 0% schema descriptions, and no annotations or output schema, the description is severely incomplete. An agent cannot determine how to paginate, sort, or filter without external 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 coverage is 0% and the description provides absolutely no information about the 8 parameters (page, search, orderBy, perPage, queryFilter, orderDirection, paginationSeed, orderByNullPosition). It neither names nor explains any parameter.

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 a specific verb (list) and resource (foods), and even names the REST endpoint. However, it doesn't differentiate from closely named siblings like recipes_foods_get_one or explore_foods_get_all, leaving some ambiguity.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention pagination defaults, when to prefer explore_foods_get_all, or any context about the recipes vs explore distinction.

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