neuron_recipe_list

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. It goes beyond a bare 'list recipes' by specifying exactly what the output shows: name, description, accumulated learnings, and run count. This gives the agent a good sense of the tool's return value, though it does not explicitly state side-effect-free behavior.

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?

Two sentences with no filler. The primary action and scope are front-loaded, and the second sentence efficiently enumerates the output fields. Every word earns its place.

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 zero-parameter list tool with no output schema, the description is fully adequate. It identifies what the tool does and what information will be returned, which is sufficient for an agent to select and invoke it correctly.

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 tool has zero parameters, so there are no parameter semantics to document. The baseline for a no-parameter tool is 4, and the description correctly focuses on the tool's output rather than nonexistent inputs.

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 states a specific verb ('List'), a clear resource ('all available recipes'), and the scope ('bundled + user-installed'). This differentiates it from sibling tools like neuron_recipe_get, neuron_recipe_run, and neuron_recipe_create without needing to inspect their schemas.

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 makes it clear this is the enumeration/discovery tool for recipes, which gives clear context for when to use it. It does not explicitly state when-not-to-use alternatives such as neuron_recipe_get, but the 'list all' phrasing sufficiently implies the selection for a listing task.

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