recipes_units_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, yet it discloses only an implicit read-only nature via 'Get'/'GET'. It says nothing about authentication requirements, error behavior for an unknown item_id, or what the response 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 first two lines are adequately front-loaded, but the description is dominated by a long comma-separated keyword dump ('Keywords: ... view, show, read-only, mealie') that restates the name and adds no decision-relevant 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 a simple single-parameter getter this is thin: no output schema exists, so the description should at least sketch the returned unit shape, and the keyword spam substitutes for real content. An agent can call it, but it lacks everything beyond the 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 coverage is 0% and the sole parameter item_id is undocumented beyond its UUID format in the schema. The endpoint template hints that item_id identifies the unit, but the description adds no meaning about what a valid unit ID is or where to obtain one.

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 clear verb+resource ('Get unit') and the underlying endpoint (GET /api/units/{item_id}), so an agent can tell it fetches a single recipe unit by ID. It is distinguishable from recipes_units_get_all and recipes_units_update_one mainly through the name rather than explicit differentiation in the text.

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 recipes_units_get_all, recipes_foods_get_one, or other getters, and no prerequisites or exclusions. The trailing keyword list signals nothing about selection conditions.

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