crompton_cookbook

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden. It explains that the tool returns a cookbook with specified sections and mentions the approximate size (~12 KB). It does not detail return format or side effects, but for an informational tool this is mostly sufficient.

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 concise, front-loaded with the purpose, and well-structured: first the general action, then content listing, then usage instructions. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy.

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 the tool's simplicity (one optional parameter, no output schema), the description covers the essential aspects: what it returns (cookbook with sections) and how to use it. It lacks explicit mention of return format (likely plain text or markdown), which is a minor gap. Overall, it's complete enough for the tool's role.

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?

The schema has 100% coverage, describing each enum value. The description adds meaningful context by explaining the slugs (e.g., 'recipe-1..5' correspond to worked recipes) and the default behavior (full cookbook if omitted). This enriches understanding beyond the schema alone.

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 tool 'Get the Stage API cookbook' and lists its contents (worked recipes and reference sections). It distinguishes from sibling tools (which focus on specific data like album characters or tracks) by presenting itself as a guide for API usage.

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 provides usage guidance: 'Read this first if you're new to the API' indicates when to use the full cookbook, and mentioning the `section` parameter for slicing single parts gives flexibility. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use the tool or suggest alternatives, though no sibling tool serves a similar purpose.

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