search_recipes

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses key behaviors: 'All words must match' for query semantics, return fields (id/title/tags/snippet), and that results are text only with no photos, requiring get_recipe for photos. This goes well beyond the schema.

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 concise sentences, each earning its place: purpose/filter overview, return summary, and cross-reference to get_recipe. It is front-loaded with the main action and contains no filler.

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 an output schema exists and parameters are simple, the description covers the essential aspects: search semantics, filters, return severity, and how to get full recipes. Missing a mention of the limit parameter is a minor gap, but overall it is complete enough 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?

The description adds meaning for the query parameter ('All words must match') and lists tag, favorite, and want_to_cook as optional filters. However, it does not describe the limit parameter or clarify the meaning of boolean filters beyond their names. Since schema descriptions are absent (0% coverage), this is a partial compensation.

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 opens with a specific verb+resource: 'Full-text search the Mela recipe library.' It clearly distinguishes from siblings by stating that results are summaries (id/title/tags/snippet) and directing users to get_recipe for full details, including photos.

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?

It provides a clear workflow: first use search_recipes, then call get_recipe with a result id to see the full recipe with photos. This implies when to use this tool vs get_recipe, though it does not explicitly discuss other siblings like list_tags or state exclusions.

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