Draft recipe from tutorial

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds value by specifying 'conservative operator chain' and 'without writing files or touching the TD bridge', which reinforces non-destructive behavior and clarifies the output format. It does not detail error handling or limitations but is sufficient given the annotation coverage.

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 a single, well-structured sentence that conveys the core purpose, constraints, and output without waste. Every part is essential.

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?

The description covers the high-level function and output, but with 11 parameters and a complex input schema, it could mention key parameters like 'name' (tutorial identifier) or 'strict' (error behavior) to help agents. Since an output schema exists, the lack of return value description is acceptable. Overall adequate but not comprehensive.

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 82%, so the schema already documents most parameters. The tool description does not add parameter-specific meaning beyond the schema. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states the verb ('extract and draft'), the resource ('operator chain from an embedded TouchDesigner tutorial', 'RecipeSchema JSON'), and includes constraints ('conservative', 'read-only', 'without writing files or touching the TD bridge'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like draft_recipe_from_operator_chain or draft_recipe_from_technique by specifying the source as a tutorial.

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 implies safe, read-only usage but does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over alternatives like draft_recipe_from_operator_chain. No exclusions or when-not-to-use guidance is provided. The context is clear but not comparative.

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