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 carry the behavioral disclosure burden, but it only implies read-only retrieval via the word 'Get'. It does not mention token validity, access requirements, shared-recipe semantics, or any side effects, leaving important behavioral traits undisclosed.

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 short, but this is under-specification rather than effective conciseness. It front-loads nothing meaningful and omits essential context about the token and the shared-recipe workflow.

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?

Even though the output schema exists and there is only one parameter, the description is too thin to be complete. It fails to explain what 'shared by token' means, how the token is used, or when this endpoint is appropriate, leaving an agent with insufficient context for correct invocation.

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 for the undocumented token_id parameter. It does not explain what the token represents, how it should be obtained, or how it affects the request, providing no value beyond the bare schema.

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' essentially restates the title in abbreviated form and adds no specificity about the token-based access mechanism. It does not differentiate this from sibling tools like get_shared_recipes_by_item or list_recipes_shared_by_token_zip.

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 given about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_shared_recipes_by_item or list_shared_recipes. The description offers no context, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage purely from the tool name.

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