list_recipes

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

No annotations are provided, but the description indicates a read-only catalog operation by saying 'lists'. It adds useful context about the output (templates, produced outputs, config field mappings). It does not explicitly state 'non-mutating' or discuss permissions, but for a simple list tool this is largely sufficient, hence a 4.

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 succinct sentences that front-load the purpose and provide an actionable next step, with no wasted words.

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 no parameters and no output schema, the description adequately covers what the tool does and how to use it, including the workflow of choosing a recipe and invoking its tool. It is complete for a catalog 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?

This tool has zero parameters and an empty input schema. The description does not need to explain parameters, but mentions the output includes config fields, which adds context. Since no parameters exist, the baseline of 4 is appropriate.

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 it lists every report template, what it produces, and config fields, using the specific term 'recipe CATALOG'. This distinguishes it from sibling list tools by focusing on report templates/recipes.

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 instructs to call this first to pick a template, then call that recipe's tool with a JSON config, providing clear usage context and sequencing.

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