List recipes (flat)

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

Annotations already declare this read-only, idempotent, non-destructive and closed-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful context about the payload shape being stripped of nested fields, but says nothing about pagination, limits, or how 'format' interacts with that payload.

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 tightly written sentences that lead with the distinguishing characteristic and end with the routing rule. No filler or restated naming.

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 output schema, the description carries the burden of describing returns and does so by contrasting minimal metadata against the nested keywords/foods/steps of list_recipes. Only minor gaps remain around 'format' behavior and result volume/pagination.

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% and the single 'format' enum with its default is fully documented in the schema, so baseline 3 applies. The description never mentions 'format' and its 'returns minimal recipe metadata' wording slightly muddies what format=full would produce.

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 ('returns minimal recipe metadata' for a recipe listing) and explicitly positions itself as a lighter variant of list_recipes. An agent can distinguish it from list_recipes from the text alone, though the sibling search_recipes is not addressed.

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?

Gives a clear use condition ('large browse queries') and names the alternative (list_recipes) with the condition that selects it (need keywords/foods/steps nested). No exclusions or guidance relative to search_recipes, which is the main gap.

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