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 of behavioral disclosure. It only states that the tool 'Search's, but does not reveal whether it is read-only, what side effects exist, return format, pagination, or any rate limits. The lack of behavioral context makes it hard for an agent to assess risks.

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, front-loaded sentence with no repetition. It efficiently states the core action and key feature (optional filters). However, it could benefit from slight expansion to cover critical parameters without losing conciseness.

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 7 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is insufficiently complete. It does not explain the return value, ordering, default behavior of limit (10), or effects of include_custom. An agent would struggle to use this tool effectively without additional context.

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 input schema has 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate for the 7 parameters. However, it only mentions 'profile hard filters', ignoring query_en (required), max_price_per_serving_eur, max_total_time_min, course, limit, and include_custom. This adds minimal value beyond the schema.

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 'Search' and the resource 'local recipe index', and mentions optional 'profile hard filters'. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like list_custom_recipes, which also list recipes. Still, it is specific enough to convey the tool's primary function.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as list_custom_recipes or get_pantry. The phrase 'optional profile hard filters' is vague and does not clarify when profile_id should be set or what constitutes a hard filter. No exclusions or alternative hints provided.

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