Search Recipes (FatSecret)

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds the 'public' constraint and keyword-based search, but does not disclose pagination behavior, rate limits, or return format. Given the annotations cover safety, the description provides some additional context.

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 unnecessary words. It is concise and front-loaded with the core purpose, earning a perfect score for conciseness.

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 simple search tool with good annotations, the description is minimally viable: it states the core action and required parameter. However, it lacks guidance on optional parameters, pagination, and alternative tools, making it incomplete for robust agent decision-making.

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. It only explains 'query' implicitly via 'by keyword', but leaves 'maxResults' and 'pageNumber' completely unexplained. The schema provides defaults and bounds but no semantic meaning, so the description is insufficient for fully understanding the parameters.

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 clearly states the verb 'Search' with a specific resource 'the public recipe database by keyword'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'fatsecret_search_foods' (search foods) and 'fatsecret_get_recipe' (get a specific recipe).

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 indicates the tool is for keyword searching, but it does not explicitly mention when to use this vs. alternatives like getting a specific recipe or searching foods. The context is clear but there are no exclusion criteria or alternative tool references.

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