create_parser_ingredient

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

With no annotations provided, the description must convey behavioral traits. It fails to disclose whether this tool is destructive, creates records, requires authentication, or any side effects. The phrase 'parse ingredient' implies a transformation but no details.

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?

At two words, the description is concise but severely under-specified. It does not earn its place as it provides minimal guidance. Conciseness should not come at the cost of clarity.

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?

The tool has 3 parameters and an output schema (not shown in description), but the description lacks any context about the output, workflow, or how it fits among 50+ sibling tools. It is incomplete for effective agent use.

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 input schema has three parameters (parser with enum, ingredient required, accept-language nullable) with 0% description coverage. The description adds no meaning to any parameter. The enum values (nlp, brute, openai) are not explained, leaving the agent to guess their implications.

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 'Parse Ingredient' provides a verb and resource, indicating the tool parses an ingredient string. However, it is vague about what parsing entails and does not differentiate from similar tools like 'create_parser_ingredients' (plural). It lacks specificity on the output or purpose beyond the name.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Given the sibling includes 'create_parser_ingredients', it's unclear when to use singular vs plural. No prerequisites or context are mentioned.

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