Create Recipes Create Ai

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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry the behavioral disclosure burden. It appropriately notes that AI is used, that translation is optional, and that creation is the operation. However, it does not mention non-streaming behavior, AI-provider requirements, or other side effects, leaving some behavioral gaps.

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 concise sentences front-load the core action, enumerate input types, and mention optional translation without any filler. Every sentence 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 6-parameter create operation with no annotations, the description covers the primary flow and an output schema exists, but it leaves two parameters unexplained and offers no guidance on valid combinations or prerequisites. Adequate for basic use, but with clear gaps.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must add meaning. It usefully clarifies content formats (HTML, JSON, or text), images, URL, and translateLanguage. However, 'accept-language' and 'createNewOrganizers' are completely unexplained, so it only partially compensates for the schema gap.

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 and resource ('Create a recipe') and enumerates the accepted inputs: content (HTML, JSON, or text), images, and a URL. It clearly distinguishes this as the flexible AI-powered combined-input tool versus URL-only or HTML/JSON-only sibling tools.

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?

'Any combination of content, images, and a URL' implies this is the general-purpose multi-source creation tool, but it does not explicitly name alternatives like create_recipes_create_url or create_recipes_create_ai_stream, nor state when to prefer them. Usage context is implied rather than explicit.

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