build_recipe_html_tool

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

With no annotations, the description discloses several automatic behaviors such as filename sanitization, ISO time calculation, file saving, and index update. This provides useful side-effect awareness, though it omits details on permissions, error handling, and reversibility.

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 concise, with a clear purpose sentence followed by a bulleted list of automatic tasks. The list is dense but efficient, avoiding unnecessary words.

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 13 parameters, no annotations, and an output schema that does not help input semantics, the description lacks sufficient context about how to use the tool effectively. It covers side effects but not parameter meaning or usage scenarios.

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 does not reference any parameter names. Since schema description coverage is 0%, the agent has no explanations for fields like recipe_name, tips, source, or cook_time. The task list (e.g., 'Leerzeichen Menge/Einheit') hints at processing but does not map to specific parameters.

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 clearly states 'Erstellt HTML aus strukturierten Rezeptdaten' (Creates HTML from structured recipe data), using a specific verb and resource. It also lists various processing tasks, distinguishing itself from sibling tools like get_server_version and get_recipe_prompt.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool or when to prefer alternatives. It does not mention exclusions, prerequisites, or context, leaving the agent without criteria for selection.

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