get_recipe

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does add real context beyond the schema: metric units, the exact stat/ingredient shape returned, and the staleness warning relative to update_recipe. It does not explicitly state read-only safety or error behavior for a bad id, keeping it short of a 5.

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?

Three compact lines, front-loaded with the verb and resource, then return payload, then units and freshness caveat. No filler or restated title.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values needn't be spelled out, and the description still usefully enumerates the stat/ingredient sections and flags data staleness. The only gap is the absence of any recipe_id semantics, which is minor for a one-param read tool.

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 coverage is 0% and the sole parameter recipe_id has no schema description, so the description should compensate — it does not mention id format, source, or validity. It is only saved by the fact that a single required identifier on a 'read one recipe' tool is self-evident.

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?

States a specific verb ('Read one recipe') plus the exact payload returned: summary, target stats with named fields (batchSize, og, fg, abv, ibu, color), and ingredient bill categories. 'One recipe' implicitly separates it from the plural sibling find_recipes, so an agent can route correctly without opening a schema.

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 by 'Read one recipe' and the note that data is 'as last saved... stale after update_recipe' hints at a read-after-write caveat, but no explicit when-to-use condition or named alternative (e.g., use find_recipes to search, use this when you already have an id) is given.

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