Get Session Recipes

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full burden, and it does usefully disclose that data lives in session-scoped in-memory storage and is reconstructed from virtual structures. It says nothing about behavior when session_id is unknown, when recipe_id is absent from the session, or whether results are bounded in size.

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?

Front-loaded with a one-sentence purpose and organized into usage and return-value blocks, with no filler sentences. The return-value bullets partly restate what the output schema already declares, adding some length that does not earn its place.

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?

An output schema exists, so the enumerated return fields are redundant rather than required, and the read-only nature is evident from the text. The definition is still incomplete about session-missing or recipe-not-found outcomes and about how to obtain a valid session_id, which matters for a session-scoped tool.

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 nested query_input object already documents session_id as required and recipe_id as an optional single-recipe filter. The description restates those semantics ('Retrieve specific recipe details by recipe_id') without adding format, identifier source, or edge-case behavior, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 and resource (retrieve stored recipes) plus scope (current virtual session, in-memory storage) and what comes back (ingredients, instructions). It does not name the near-siblings get_temp_session_recipes or get_recipe, so an agent must still infer which session-recipe tool applies.

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?

The 'Use this tool to' bullet list gives concrete contexts (review all, fetch by recipe_id, compare recipes) and the schema notes that omitting recipe_id returns everything. It stops short of when-not guidance or naming alternatives such as the temp-session or favorites tools.

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