Add a Community recipe

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, and the description adds real behavioral detail beyond them: a household copy is created, favorite=true has a side effect, and the returned id is the household's copy rather than the library id. It does not cover permissions, failure modes, or whether re-adding duplicates an existing copy.

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 tight sentences, front-loaded with the core action, then the optional flag, then the return-value routing advice. No filler or restatement of the 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 need not be documented, yet the description still flags that the returned id is the household copy to use on ballots — the one downstream detail an agent must know. Nothing essential is missing for a two-parameter copy 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 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds meaning the schema lacks: recipe_id must come from search_recipes (library scope), and favorite: true not only sets a flag but marks the copy a favorite.

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 and resource with scope: 'Copy a recipe from Community recipes ... into this household.' It also disambiguates from siblings import_recipe/create_recipe by naming the source collection and the search_recipes scope that identifies it.

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?

Explicitly routes the agent: names search_recipes with scope 'library' as the source, and states that passing a library id straight to propose_recipes or add_candidates achieves the same copy automatically, so the agent knows when this call is redundant.

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