fetch_recipe

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool returns raw data and mentions supported sources, but it does not discuss auth, rate limits, or error behavior. It adequately suggests a non-destructive read operation.

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 moderately concise, with a clear structure separating supported sources from post-fetch instructions. Every sentence adds value, though the extra guidance for the calling model could be considered slightly beyond the tool's core description.

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 the tool's complexity (multiple source types) and the existence of an output schema, the description is fairly complete. It covers input, output, and follow-up actions, though it omits error specifics.

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?

With schema description coverage at 0%, the description adds meaning by implying that the 'url' parameter should point to a supported recipe source. However, it lacks details like format examples or validation rules.

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 the verb ('liest ein Rezept') and resource ('aus einer beliebigen Quelle') and specifies supported sources, distinguishing it from sibling tools like find_recipe_image and save_thermomix_recipe.

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 explains when to use this tool (to fetch raw recipe data from a URL) and provides a clear next-step pipeline (convert to Thermomix recipe, save). It lacks explicit when-not-to-use or alternatives, but the context is clear.

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