Skip to main content
Glama
Symfomany

Recettes MCP Server

by Symfomany

invent_magical_recipe

Generate magical recipes from specified magical ingredients, with options to customize servings and magic type for culinary enchantments.

Instructions

Invents a magical recipe from magical ingredients.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
magical_ingredientsYes
servingsNo
magic_typeNoenchantement

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Implementation Reference

  • main.py:287-290 (registration)
    Registers the 'invent_magical_recipe' tool with the FastMCP framework using the @mcp.tool decorator.
    @mcp.tool(
        name="invent_magical_recipe",
        description="Invents a magical recipe from magical ingredients.",
    )
  • main.py:291-313 (handler)
    The main handler function that generates a magical recipe dictionary including title, servings, ingredients, steps, magic_type, and a tips URI based on input parameters.
    async def invent_magical_recipe(
        magical_ingredients: List[str],
        servings: int = 2,
        magic_type: str = "enchantement"
    ) -> Dict[str, object]:
        """Invente une recette magique à partir d'ingrédients magiques."""
        title = f"Recette Magique de {magic_type}"
    
        steps = [
            "Mélanger les ingrédients magiques sous la lune.",
            "Chanter une incantation appropriée.",
            "Laisser infuser avec de la magie pure.",
            "Servir avec un sort de présentation.",
        ]
    
        return {
            "title": title,
            "servings": servings,
            "ingredients": magical_ingredients,
            "steps": steps,
            "magic_type": magic_type,
            "tips_uri": "recipes://tips/general",
        }
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool 'invents' a recipe, implying a creative or generative action, but doesn't clarify if this is a read-only operation, requires permissions, has side effects, or involves rate limits. The description lacks details on output format or error handling, leaving significant gaps in understanding tool behavior.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, efficient sentence that front-loads the core action ('invents a magical recipe'). There's no wasted verbiage, and it directly states the purpose. However, it could be more structured by including key details, but as-is, it's appropriately concise for its limited content.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool has an output schema (which handles return values), no annotations, and low schema coverage, the description is incomplete. It covers the basic purpose but misses usage guidelines, parameter details, and behavioral context. For a creative tool with 3 parameters, this is minimally viable but leaves clear gaps in agent understanding.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for undocumented parameters. It mentions 'magical ingredients,' which aligns with the 'magical_ingredients' parameter, but doesn't explain the 'servings' or 'magic_type' parameters or their defaults. The description adds minimal meaning beyond the schema, failing to address the coverage gap adequately.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose3/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states the tool 'invents a magical recipe from magical ingredients,' which provides a clear verb ('invents') and resource ('magical recipe'), but it's vague about what 'invents' entails (e.g., generation vs. creation) and doesn't differentiate from siblings like 'invent_recipe' or 'generate_recipe_from_ingredients.' It avoids tautology by not restating the name or title, but lacks specificity.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention siblings like 'invent_recipe' (non-magical variant) or 'generate_recipe_from_ingredients,' nor does it provide context such as prerequisites or exclusions. Usage is implied only by the mention of 'magical' ingredients, but this is insufficient for effective tool selection.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/Symfomany/mcp-tuto'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server