Get Recipe

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

With no annotations supplied, the description carries the full burden and does meaningful work: it discloses the data source (local recipes.json snapshot), the prerequisite build command `foodguide data build recipes`, and the fact that no network fetch occurs, which implies staleness relative to live canada.ca data. It stops short of describing error behavior or whether results can be missing for unbuilt snapshots.

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?

Two short sentences with the core action front-loaded and the offline/snapshot caveat immediately after; no filler, no restatement of the title.

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 single-parameter read tool with a full output schema, the description covers the essential behavioral facts (local snapshot, no fetch, build prerequisite). The only gaps are edge cases such as unknown slugs or missing snapshot data, which are minor given the rich output schema.

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 100% and the single url_or_slug parameter already documents accepted slug and both URL forms in detail. The description adds nothing about the parameter, so the baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 gives a specific verb and resource ("Retrieve the complete details of one Food Guide recipe") with scope ("one"), which is clearly distinct from bulk/lookup siblings. It does not name or route against the most relevant alternative, search_recipes, which would make the purpose unambiguous for an agent deciding between lookup and search.

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?

Usage is implied rather than stated: the tool is for fetching a single known recipe by slug/URL, and the "offline ... no page is fetched" note signals it reads a prebuilt snapshot. There is no explicit when-to-use versus search_recipes, nor any statement of what happens when the slug is unknown or the snapshot was never built.

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