Skip to main content
Glama

create_recipe

Create a complete recipe with steps, ingredients, and servings in one call. Use existing foods, units, and keywords; amounts scale automatically via templated instructions.

Instructions

Create a new recipe with all its steps and ingredients in one call.

Every food, unit and keyword must be referenced by id and name, looked up with search_foods / search_units / search_keywords beforehand. Reduce each written ingredient line to a singular base noun for the search and put adjectives and preparation into the ingredient's note: '100 g geriebener Parmesan' becomes food 'Parmesan', unit 'g', amount 100, note 'gerieben'.

STEP TEMPLATING Instructions are Jinja templates. Placeholders are replaced when the recipe is viewed, and amounts inside them rescale automatically when the user changes the serving count. Literal numbers you type do not rescale.

{{ ingredients[0] }} amount + unit + food, plural-aware ("2 Chilischoten", "30 Gramm Ingwerwurzel", "2 Zehen Knoblauch") {{ ingredients[0].food }} just the food name, plural-aware {{ ingredients[0].amount }} just the number, scaling {{ ingredients[0].unit }} just the unit {{ ingredients[0].note }} the note; notes are NOT part of {{ ingredients[0] }} {{ scale(200) }} any other number that should scale with servings

The index is ZERO-BASED and refers to the ingredient list of the SAME step, in the order you supply it. Indexes are not shared across steps.

CRITICAL: an out-of-range index renders as an empty string, silently — the sentence simply loses a word and nothing reports an error. Count the step's own ingredients before writing an index. This server rejects out-of-range indexes, so a rejection means your index was wrong, not that the syntax was.

Convention worth following: annotate each reference with a Jinja comment so the template stays readable, e.g. {{ ingredients[1] }}{# Ingwerwurzel #} schälen und grob würfeln. Comments render to nothing.

Write prose and put a placeholder wherever an amount or an ingredient name occurs, instead of repeating the numbers literally.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
recipeYes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does so thoroughly. It explains the required id+name references, the silent empty-string rendering for out-of-range template indexes, the server's rejection of such indexes, and the zero-based per-step indexing behavior. This gives agents a precise mental model of how the tool behaves, including failure modes.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is long but every section earns its place: the lookup prerequisite, ingredient normalization rule, templating reference, critical out-of-range warning, and convention example. Headings and the CRITICAL callout make the dense information scannable and actionable.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a tool with nested recipe/step/ingredient inputs, templating behavior, and no annotations, the description covers the essential operational details completely. It addresses the key gotchas an agent would face: entity lookup, zero-based indexing, scaling behavior, and silent failures. The output schema can handle return-value documentation, so its omission is not a gap.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The schema has 0% description coverage at the top level, but the description heavily compensates. It explains how to reduce ingredient lines, how to separate notes from food names, and every templating placeholder with examples. This adds substantial meaning that the schema alone does not convey.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description opens with 'Create a new recipe with all its steps and ingredients in one call,' using a specific verb and resource while clarifying the all-in-one scope. This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like update_recipe, delete_recipe, and get_recipe. The purpose is unmistakable.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description gives clear context: use this to create a full recipe after looking up foods, units, and keywords via the search tools. It does not explicitly mention alternatives like 'use update_recipe to modify an existing recipe,' but the create-oriented purpose and the prerequisite search steps provide strong usage guidance.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/Hugeldugelking/tandoor-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server