update_recipe_image

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It only hints at overwrite behavior via 'Replace (full update)'; it says nothing about required permissions, whether the prior image is destroyed, or what the response looks like — thin coverage for a mutation tool.

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 clause is well front-loaded, but roughly half the text is a keyword-stuffing block ('update_recipe_image, update recipe image, update image, replace image...') that is pure SEO padding. The useful content is a single short sentence buried in noise.

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?

With no annotations, no output schema, and 50% param coverage, the description should compensate but does not. Auth requirements, the destructive nature of the replacement, and the returned payload are all absent for a PUT mutation.

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 only 50% and the description text adds no parameter meaning at all. The schema itself notes that file fields must be absolute local paths, but the description never reinforces or extends this, leaving the 'slug' and 'extension' parameters unexplained in the prose.

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+resource ('Update Recipe Image') and clarifies the semantics ('Replace (full update) image'), which distinguishes a full overwrite from a partial edit. However, it never names or differentiates itself from close siblings like upload_recipe_asset, scrape_image_url, or delete_recipe_image, so the agent gets no explicit routing help.

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 and no alternatives named. The parenthetical '(full update)' hints that this replaces rather than patches, but which sibling to pick for adding an asset or scraping a URL is left entirely to inference.

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