recipes_foods_get_one

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the HTTP verb and path (GET /api/foods/{item_id}), which implicitly communicates read-only behavior, but says nothing about 404/error handling, authentication needs, or what a returned food contains.

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 substantive content is one short phrase ('Get food'); the rest is a long redundant keyword dump ('recipes foods get one, get food, fetch food, read food...') that adds no selection value and bloats the definition.

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 lookup tool with one identifier parameter, no annotations, and no output schema, the description should clarify what is returned and how to handle missing ids. It provides none of this, leaving the agent with only the bare endpoint.

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 the single required item_id has no description in the schema. The description only surfaces the parameter implicitly via the endpoint template {item_id}; it does not state that it must be a UUID or how to obtain it, so it fails to compensate for the coverage gap.

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 clear verb+resource ('Get food') and the underlying endpoint GET /api/foods/{item_id}, so an agent knows this retrieves a single food record by id. However, it does nothing to distinguish itself from the closely-named sibling explore_foods_get_one, which appears to fetch the same resource type.

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 when-to-use guidance: no mention of when to prefer this over explore_foods_get_one, recipes_foods_get_all, or any other lookup, and no preconditions. The remaining text is a keyword list, which restates synonyms rather than giving selection criteria.

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