List Recipe Organizers

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered. Beyond that the description only adds that records carry a name and slug, and an output schema exists to document returns, so added behavioral context is thin but not contradictory.

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?

One sentence, front-loaded with the verb and resource, with no redundant or filler wording. Every clause contributes: the list of kinds, the returned fields, and the motivating use case.

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?

Low-complexity read-only list tool with complete schema descriptions, an output schema, and full annotation coverage. The only ambiguity is what 'tools' means as an organizer kind, which is minor given the enum and output schema.

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 coverage is 100%, with the 'kind' enum and its values documented and 'search' described as an optional name filter, so the schema carries most of the load. The description echoes the enum values (tags, categories, tools) but adds no new detail, such as whether 'search' matches slug or name.

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?

States a specific verb (list) and resource (recipe organizers: tags, categories, tools) and narrows it with the returned fields 'name and slug', so an agent knows exactly what this returns. It also links to a sibling (search_recipes) as the downstream consumer, though it does not distinguish from list_recipes or other list_* siblings in scope.

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 'e.g. to filter search_recipes' phrase implies the intended workflow (resolve organizer names/slugs before searching), which is genuine usage context. However there is no explicit statement of when not to use it or how it relates to alternatives such as list_recipes or get_recipe.

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