Get Households Cookbooks By Item

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden of disclosing behavior. 'Get One' discloses nothing: no authentication requirements, no error/not-found behavior, no interpretation of the item_id, no mention of scoping to households or cookbooks, and no return semantics.

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 under-specified rather than appropriately concise. Brevity is not valuable when it conveys almost no operational meaning. There is no front-loaded substantive content, just the phrase 'Get One.'

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?

Despite having an output schema and only two parameters, the description is completely inadequate for tool selection and invocation. With hundreds of sibling tools and no annotations, an agent cannot determine what resource is returned, what 'by item' means, or how to correctly fill parameters. The output schema does not rescue the missing context.

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%, and the description provides zero meaning for item_id or accept-language. The schema only supplies types; it does not explain what item_id identifies, whether it is a cookbook ID, household ID, or recipe ID, or what accept-language affects. The description fails to compensate for the low schema coverage.

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 'Get One' is nearly tautological: it restates the 'get' and single-item ('by item') nature of the tool without naming the resource or what 'One' refers to. While the tool name itself is relatively informative, the description does not independently explain what the tool does or distinguish it from the many sibling get-by-item 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?

There is no guidance about when to use this tool, what criteria select it, or when an alternative such as list_households_cookbooks or other get-by-item endpoints would be appropriate. An agent receives no contextual signal beyond the bare operation name.

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