recipes_units_merge_one

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

No annotations provided, so description must reveal behavior. It does not mention whether the fromUnit is deleted, if recipes referencing it are updated, or if the operation is destructive. Complete lack of transparency.

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 description is very short but this brevity is detrimental. It omits essential information, making it under-specified rather than concise. A single line with no structure does not serve the 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?

Given the complexity of a merge operation (likely destructive, involving UUIDs), the description is completely inadequate. No output schema, no annotations, and no context. The agent has no way to understand the tool's full impact or prerequisites.

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 description adds no parameter explanation. The fields fromUnit and toUnit are not described; agents cannot infer which unit gets merged into which or any constraints (e.g., must be from same household). The description fails to compensate for the schema 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 'Merge One' plus HTTP path is vague. It does not clarify what merging means: whether it combines two units into one, deletes one, or updates entries. The name suggests merging a unit, but the purpose is not clearly stated.

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 vs alternatives (e.g., update or delete unit). No prerequisites or context are provided. The agent cannot determine if this is the right tool.

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