test_parse_recipe_url

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

With no annotations and no description of side effects, the agent cannot infer whether this tool saves data, requires authentication, or has any rate limits. The description offers no behavioral insights beyond the 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?

While short, the description is under-specified. It is not concise in a helpful way; it sacrifices essential information for brevity without adding value.

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 test tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description should explain what the test does, its return value, and how it differs from the production parse. It fails to address any of these, leaving the agent completely uninformed.

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 does not mention the 'body' parameter or its nested fields ('url', 'useOpenAI'). The agent gets no help understanding required inputs.

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 restates the name and adds the HTTP endpoint but fails to clarify what 'Test' means compared to the sibling tool 'parse_recipe_url'. It does not specify that this is a non-destructive preview or a dry run, leaving 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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'parse_recipe_url' or 'parse_recipe_url_bulk'. The description lacks any context about its intended use case or exclusions.

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