search_by_first_letter

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=false (mutation expected), idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description says 'save recipes', which implies a write operation, aligning with readOnlyHint=false. However, it provides no additional context about what 'save' means (e.g., persists to a database, what happens on repeated calls), nor does it explain the side effect beyond the annotations. With annotations present, the bar is lower, but the description adds minimal behavioral context beyond 'save'.

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 sentence with no redundant words. It front-loads the core purpose and is appropriately concise. However, it could have added parameter guidance without becoming verbose.

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 tool has an output schema, so return values are likely defined elsewhere. However, the description lacks clarification on the 'save' behavior, the meaning of max_results, and how this tool differs from search_recipes. Given the complexity (2 params, mutation side effect, open world hint), the description is incomplete for an agent to confidently invoke it 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for explaining both parameters. However, the description only mentions the 'letter' parameter ('whose names begin with one ASCII letter') and does not explain the 'max_results' parameter (limit/controls the number of recipes returned). Since max_results has a default and bounds but no description, the agent lacks guidance on its meaning. This is a significant gap given zero coverage.

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 action ('Find and save recipes') and a specific resource ('recipes') with a clear criterion (names begin with one ASCII letter). It is not a tautology and conveys a clear purpose. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like search_recipes, but the first-letter criterion is a distinctive behavior.

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: use this tool when you need recipes starting with a specific letter. It does not provide explicit when-not-to-use guidance or mention alternatives like search_recipes for general searches. The 'save' behavior hints at a side effect, but no exclusions are stated.

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