recipes_units_get_all

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It implies a read via 'List units' and the 'read-only' keyword, but says nothing about pagination behavior, default page size, ordering defaults, or result shape for what is clearly a paginated list endpoint.

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 opening sentence is fine and front-loaded, but it is followed by a long string of redundant synonym keywords (list/get/search/find/browse/fetch/read toggled across unit/units) that adds noise rather than information.

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 an 8-parameter list endpoint with no annotations, no output schema, and no required-parameter guidance, the description leaves the agent without the information needed to invoke it correctly. It fails to cover the parameters that are the tool's main interface.

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?

The tool has 8 parameters (page, search, orderBy, perPage, queryFilter, orderDirection, paginationSeed, orderByNullPosition) with 0% schema description coverage, and the description explains none of them. The pagination and ordering controls are completely undocumented anywhere.

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 (Get/List) and resource (units) plus the backing endpoint [GET /api/units], so the operation is unambiguous. It does not, however, distinguish itself from the sibling recipes_units_get_one, so an agent must infer that 'get_all' means the collection rather than one record.

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 versus the sibling get_one or the create/update/delete variants. The only rudimentary guidance is the block of synonym keywords, which offers no conditions or exclusions.

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