mealie_create_recipe_from_text

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden, and it discloses key behavioral traits: confirmation requirement, ingredient storage in display/note for mobile rendering, and the cover crop fallback chain. It doesn't detail overwrite_existing behavior, but the self-explanatory default and output schema mitigate this.

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 front-loaded with purpose and uses concise paragraph breaks for prerequisites, workflow, and crop logic. It is longer than ideal but every section covers distinct useful behavior without repetition.

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 19-param mutation tool with no annotations, the description gives enough context about prerequisites, workflow, and image handling to invoke correctly. The presence of an output schema covers return values, so the remaining gaps are minor.

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%, but the description explains the non-obvious parameters including confirmed_by_user, cover_crop_box, cover_crop_units, cover_crop_source_url, and source image fallback order. It leaves basic fields like cook_time and servings to their self-explanatory names, which is reasonable given the complexity.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Create a Mealie recipe from OCR/vision-extracted text and optional images.' This clearly differentiates it from sibling tools like mealie_create_recipe_from_url and describes the transformation.

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?

It explicitly states when to use: after showing a preview and getting confirmation, and requires mutations enabled AND confirmed_by_user=True. It also gives crop guidance for cookbook/photo imports, providing enough context to choose this tool over URL-based import.

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