List Umami recipe books

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the transparency burden. It clarifies the access scope ('owned by or shared with') and the authentication requirement, and 'List' clearly implies a non-mutating read operation. It does not disclose output formatting or pagination, but that is a minor omission for a simple 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?

Two sentences with no filler. The first states the action and resource, the second provides the usage context. Every sentence earns 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?

For a zero-parameter listing tool with no output schema, the description is complete enough: it defines the resource scope, notes the authentication requirement, and explains the main use case (obtaining a recipeBookId for create_recipe). It does not list return fields in detail, but it names the key result value the agent needs.

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?

The tool accepts zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description adds no parameter-level details, but none are needed. It instead tells the agent what the result is used for (obtaining a recipeBookId), which is more valuable here.

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 the specific verb 'List' and identifies the exact resource: 'recipe books owned by or shared with the authenticated Umami account.' It also distinguishes from sibling recipe-focused tools by explaining that it provides the recipeBookId needed before creating a 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 gives an explicit use case: 'Use this to obtain a recipeBookId before creating a recipe,' which clearly signals when to call the tool. It does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives, but sibling tool names like find_recipes and create_recipe make the boundary apparent.

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