listRecipes

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It adds useful behavioral details like 'copy-paste-ready implementation' and 'Pro recipes are shown with a 🔒 badge', but it does not disclose ordering, pagination, authentication needs, or how the 'all' category behaves. This is minimal but adequate for a simple read/list 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 description is two concise sentences with the main action front-loaded. Every sentence adds value, and there is no redundancy or fluff.

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?

The tool is simple (one optional parameter, no output schema), and the description provides enough context: what recipes are, category options, and badge behavior. No return-value details are necessary for a list tool of this scope, and sibling context confirms its role.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description lists the category values but omits the 'all' option, and it does not add meaning beyond what the schema's 'Filter by category. Default all' already provides. Marginal value; no contradictions.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') with a clear resource ('production-ready React/Next.js code recipes') and provides category details and badge behavior. This clearly distinguishes it from the sibling tools 'searchRecipes' (search) and 'getRecipe' (get a single recipe).

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 description implies use for browsing all recipes and lists categories, but it does not explicitly explain when to use listRecipes versus searchRecipes or getRecipe. No exclusions or alternative guidance is provided, so usage context is only implicit.

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