get_recipes_shared_by_token

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

With no annotations provided, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It fails to do so—no mention of authentication requirements, read-only nature, or what the response contains. The agent cannot infer any behavioral constraints.

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 extremely short (two words), but this is under-specification rather than efficient conciseness. It lacks critical information that a few more sentences could provide.

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?

While there is an output schema (not shown), the description still needs to provide context for a tool with one required parameter and no annotations. It is incomplete, offering no usage context or behavioral details.

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 for the single parameter token_id. It does not explain what a token ID is, how to obtain one, or its expected format beyond the schema's UUID type. No value is added.

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 Shared Recipe' is a short phrase that restates the tool's name without adding specificity. It does not clarify that this tool retrieves a single shared recipe using a token ID, nor does it distinguish from siblings like list_shared_recipes or get_shared_recipes_by_item.

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 usage guidelines are provided. The description gives no indication of when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as list_shared_recipes for listing all shared recipes or get_shared_recipes_by_item for retrieval by ID.

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