mdl_explore_recommended

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds no behavioral context beyond that, such as what 'recommended' means, what data is returned, or any pagination or auth requirements.

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 and front-loaded, but it is under-specified rather than genuinely concise. The first fragment repeats the tool name, and the second adds little beyond the schema.

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?

For a read-only explore tool with one passthrough parameter, the description does not explain what 'recommended' returns or how to populate params. With no output schema and no parameter descriptions, an agent lacks enough context to invoke it confidently.

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 single parameter. It only says 'params is a JSON object of upstream parameters,' which adds marginal meaning over the schema's anyOf object/null type but does not explain what keys or values are expected.

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 'Explore: recommended.' essentially restates the tool name and does not state a specific action or resource. It fails to distinguish this tool from siblings like mdl_titles_get_recommendations or other mdl_explore_* 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?

No guidance is given about when to use this tool versus the many sibling recommendation or explore tools. The agent receives no context about prerequisites, alternatives, or appropriate scenarios.

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