skylight_add_recipe_to_grocery_list

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the basic action and does not mention side effects, duplicate handling, whether recipe ingredients are added as separate items, idempotency, or required permissions. For a mutating operation, this is a meaningful gap.

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 efficient sentence with no wasted words and the core action front-loaded. It could include slightly more context, but as a concise high-level summary it is well-structured.

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?

Given three parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description leaves important context unspecified: what 'id' refers to, what 'frameId' does, how ingredients are added, and what a successful result looks like. An agent can make a plausible guess but not call it with full confidence.

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 only 33%, and the description adds no parameter details. The required 'id' is undocumented and can only be inferred as the recipe id from the tool name and description. 'frameId' is completely unexplained, and 'list_id' is documented only in the schema.

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 gives a specific verb ('Add'), a clear resource ('a recipe's ingredients'), and a target ('a grocery list'). It is clear enough to identify the operation, but it does not explicitly differentiate from the similar sibling add_list_item, so it falls short of a top score.

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?

No guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as add_list_item or create_list. The use case is inferable from the description, but there are no exclusions, prerequisites, or explicit routing to other tools.

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