List app recipes

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description adds content-level detail about the catalog, but that largely restates what an output schema for a catalog would expose, and it discloses no behavioral traits such as ordering, pagination, or caching.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the resource and scope. The first sentence is a long run-on enumeration of catalog fields, but every clause is load-bearing and there is no filler.

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?

With an output schema present and no inputs, the description needs only to orient the agent, which it does. Return-value explanation is correctly left to the schema, so the only real gap is the missing explicit routing to recipe_plan/recipe_apply/template_list.

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 takes zero parameters, so there is no parameter semantics for the description to carry; baseline 4 applies. Nothing in the description misleads about inputs.

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?

Specific verb+resource ('List the versioned app recipe catalog') with a concrete inventory of what the catalog contains. The closing sentence distinguishes recipes from templates, which helps separate it from the sibling template_list, though no sibling is named directly.

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?

Usage is implied — an agent can infer this is a browse-before-recipe_plan/recipe_apply call — but there is no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or named alternative (e.g. template_list for generic stacks, recipe_plan for pre-apply planning).

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