Create Recipes Create Url

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does mention the side effect of loading data into the database and hedges with 'attempts', but it omits important behavioral context such as authentication needs, failure behavior, rate limits, or whether existing data may be affected.

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?

The description is a single, focused sentence with no filler. It front-loads the primary input ('a URL') and immediately states the action, making it easy to parse.

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 four parameters, zero schema descriptions, no annotations, and a write/scraping operation, this description is too thin. It does not explain the optional parameters, the expected behavior on failure, or how this differs from the streaming and bulk URL variants. The presence of an output schema helps return-value understanding, but not selection or parameter usage.

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 compensate. It only adds meaning for the 'url' parameter by identifying it as the scrape source; the includeTags, accept-language, and includeCategories parameters remain entirely unexplained in both the schema and the description.

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 a specific action ('takes in a URL', 'scrape data and load it into the database') and identifies the resource. However, it does not distinguish this tool from closely related siblings such as create_recipes_create_url_stream, create_recipes_create_url_bulk, or create_recipes_test_scrape_url, so an agent cannot tell exactly when this variant is intended.

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?

There is no guidance about when to use this tool versus the similar URL-based siblings. The description implies it is for scraping a single URL into the database, but it provides no exclusions, prerequisites, or alternative selection criteria.

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