Save recipe

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

The description and schema indicate that saving an existing name replaces the recipe, which is destructive, yet annotations declare destructiveHint=false. This is a direct contradiction and the description fails to disclose the overwrite behavior beyond the annotation.

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?

One clear sentence with no redundancy, but could be more specific about behavior (though that's a transparency issue). It is front-loaded and concise.

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?

While the schema covers parameters, the tool description omits the destructive overwrite behavior and doesn't explain return values or side effects. The annotation contradiction also makes the context incomplete.

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 input schema covers all parameters with detailed descriptions, including the behavior that saving an existing name replaces the recipe. The description adds no additional parameter meaning beyond what the schema provides, so baseline 3.

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 ('save') and resource ('cocktail recipe'), and distinguishes between saving new and updating existing, which differentiates it from sibling tools like add_item or delete_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?

It implies usage for saving or updating recipes, but does not explicitly state when not to use other tools or mention prerequisites. However, it clearly communicates its purpose in the recipe lifecycle.

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