search_recipes

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses that results are compact hits with only id, name, description, and keywords, so the agent knows not to expect full recipe details. This is a meaningful behavioral trait. It doesn't mention pagination or random ordering, but those are visible in the schema.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the primary action and immediately providing the key return shape and a navigational pointer to get_recipe. Every word earns its place with no redundancy.

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?

Given the output schema exists and schema descriptions cover all parameters, the description is sufficiently complete. It adds the essential context that results are compact and that full details require a follow-up get_recipe call. It would benefit from noting the pagination behavior, but the schema already specifies page/page_size.

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%, so the description does not need to explain each parameter. The description adds no additional parameter-specific semantics beyond noting the returned id, which can be used with get_recipe. This meets the baseline but does not add extra value.

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 and resource combination ('Search recipes') and clearly distinguishes the tool from get_recipe by noting it returns only compact hits and that full details require get_recipe. It is immediately clear this is the recipe search entry point.

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 explicitly tells the agent to use get_recipe with an id from the result to read steps and ingredients, which outlines the intended workflow. It does not explicitly mention when not to use this tool or compare with other search siblings, but the search-vs-get distinction is clear.

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