Recipe Add To Shopping Tool

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. It does disclose a key trait: it skips ingredients already sufficiently in stock. However, it does not mention other side effects such as how existing list entries are handled, whether it creates new items, or what happens when a recipe is not found.

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 short sentences with no filler. The primary action and the key exclusion behavior are front-loaded, and every sentence is informative.

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 tool's low complexity, single well-documented parameter, and presence of an output schema, the description covers what is needed to call it. It could be more complete by contrasting it with shopping_list_add_missing_tool, but that is a minor gap.

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 coverage is 100% and the parameter already documents that it accepts a recipe name or numeric ID. The description adds no further parameter-level meaning, so the 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 uses a specific verb ('add') and resource ('missing ingredients for a recipe... shopping list'), and clearly scopes behavior to only missing items. This distinguishes it from generic shopping-list add tools and recipe consumption tools.

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 usage (when you need missing recipe ingredients on the shopping list) but does not explicitly state when to prefer this over the highly similar sibling shopping_list_add_missing_tool or recipe_fulfillment_tool. There is clear context but no exclusions or alternative routing.

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