update_recipes_by_slug

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

No annotations are given, so the description bears full burden. It only says 'Updates' without clarifying whether it is a full replace or partial update, what happens to omitted fields, idempotency, or side effects. Behavioral traits like required permissions or data integrity implications are missing.

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 concise sentence with no fluff, but it is too brief to be effective. It is front-loaded with the action and resource, but lacks sufficient detail.

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 the complex input schema with 35 parameters and no output schema, the description is drastically incomplete. It does not explain return values, error conditions, or required context (e.g., authentication, household). The tool is underspecified for an agent to use correctly.

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 coverage is only 3% (only slug__path has a description). The description does not explain any of the 35 parameters or their nested structures. It adds no meaning beyond what is already in the schema, failing to compensate for the low 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 'Updates a recipe by existing slug and data.' clearly states the action (update) and resource (recipe), and identifies the key identifier (slug). However, it does not distinguish from sibling tools like patch_recipes_by_slug, which might be used for partial updates, leaving ambiguity about whether this is a full replacement or merge.

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 does not indicate when to use this tool versus alternatives such as patch_recipes_by_slug or create_recipes. There is no mention of prerequisites, scope of update, or exclusivity conditions.

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