get_recipe_details

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

The verb 'liest' explicitly indicates a read-only operation, which is a behavioral trait. However, with no annotations provided, the description does not disclose other aspects like authentication requirements, rate limits, or specific behaviors such as handling invalid IDs. It is adequate but minimal.

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 clear sentence with zero wasted words. It is appropriately front-loaded and easy to process.

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?

While the tool has only one parameter and an output schema, the description lacks essential context such as how to find recipe_id, what 'official' means relative to custom recipes, or any usage notes. The minimal nature leaves gaps that a user would need to infer.

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% and the description does not explain the recipe_id parameter at all. The description fails to compensate for the lack of schema documentation, leaving the parameter's format, source, or semantics entirely unspecified.

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 states it reads details of an official Cookidoo recipe, using the specific verb 'liest' (reads) and identifying the resource ('Details eines offiziellen Cookidoo-Rezepts'). It differentiates slightly from sibling get_custom_recipe by noting 'official', though it does not explicitly name the alternative.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that get_custom_recipe should be used for custom recipes, nor any prerequisites (e.g., how to obtain a recipe_id).

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