List Recipes Suggestions

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

With no annotations, the description carries the entire behavioral burden, but 'Suggest Recipes' only names the action. It does not disclose that suggestions can be constrained by foods/tools, allow missing items, include substitutions, or return paginated/ordered results, nor whether the operation is read-only.

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 words are concise, but this is under-specification rather than efficient structure. For a tool with 14 optional parameters and no annotations, the description needs more substance; a single bare imperative does not earn 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?

The tool is complex (14 params, no annotations, no required fields) and sits among many similar recipe/explore endpoints, yet the description explains nothing beyond 'Suggest Recipes.' An agent cannot reliably decide to call it or construct a correct request from this definition.

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% across 14 parameters, and the description names none of them. The agent gets no explanation of foods, tools, maxMissingFoods, includeSubstitutions, ordering, pagination, or accept-language, so the description does nothing to compensate for the undocumented 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 gives a verb and resource ('Suggest Recipes'), so it is not a pure tautology, but it is vague: it does not say what a suggestion is based on or what it returns. It also fails to distinguish this from sibling list_explore_groups_by_group_slug_recipes_suggestions, leaving the agent to guess which endpoint matches a user's request.

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 rather than list_recipes, list_recipes_exports, or the explore-group suggestions sibling. No prerequisites, exclusions, or alternative routes are mentioned, so the agent must infer usage from the name and the 14-parameter schema.

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