Get Recipe Draft Template

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

Annotations already mark the tool read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds non-obvious behavior: defaults are not a validated model, retrieved data is frozen with verified lineage, and the preview is editable. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the core deliverable, then parameter options, then caveats. No filler or repetition of schema titles.

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?

Output schema exists, so return format needs no explanation. Combined with schema, the description covers the deliverable, parameter sourcing, constraints, downstream workflow, and non-mutating behavior sufficiently for an agent to call it 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 descriptions are 0% so the description must carry parameter meaning. It meaningfully explains uploaded_file_id and pipeline_version_id by naming their source tools and exclusivity, but family is left to its enum values with no explanation.

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?

Uses a specific verb ('get') and names the resource: shared wizard defaults, hash, and envelope schema. Also states what it is not ('Does not create, publish or run anything'), separating it from create_recipe_draft and publish_recipe_draft.

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?

Gives concrete sourcing instructions: uploaded_file_id comes from list_uploads and pipeline_version_id from list_pipelines/list_pipeline_versions, with an explicit 'never both' constraint. It describes downstream use (copy snapshot into create_recipe_draft) but does not explicitly route to a sibling like get_recipe_draft when a saved draft is needed.

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