list_recipes

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the disclosure burden. It adds meaningful behavioral detail by explaining that every node has children/name/path/recipe and that recipe is null for directories and non-null for files. It also conveys recursive comprehensiveness with 'full recipe tree.' Read-only behavior is implied by 'Return,' though not explicitly stated.

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 tight sentences with no filler. The first sentence front-loads the purpose, and the second adds essential node-structure semantics. 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 an output schema, the description is complete: it states the scope, the file types, and the meaning of the recipe field per node. An agent has enough to call the tool and interpret its result correctly.

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 has zero parameters, so there is no parameter semantics for the description to explain. The empty input schema is fully covered, and the baseline of 4 applies.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Return the full recipe tree' including folders and .cook/.menu files. This distinguishes it from siblings like read_recipe (single recipe), search_recipes (filtered lookup), and collection_stats (aggregate statistics), so an agent can select it for complete listing.

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 clearly implies this is for retrieving the entire recipe hierarchy, but it does not explicitly state when to prefer it over alternatives or when not to use it. There is no mention of sibling tools, so the usage context is implied rather than explicit.

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