Add a timeline entry

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

Annotations already confirm non-read-only (false readOnlyHint) and non-destructive (false destructiveHint), so the bar is lower. The description adds that it's a note about cooking outcomes, which is helpful context, but doesn't disclose whether it updates any derived state or has any side effects beyond the entry itself.

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?

Two sentences with zero waste. The first sentence defines the action and context, the second provides a critical sibling relationship. Perfectly front-loaded and efficient.

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 no output schema and no nested objects, the description is sufficient for a simple create tool. It covers what the tool does, how it pairs with a sibling, and the role of the timeline. Could mention the output (e.g., returns the created event ID) but isn't strictly necessary for a tool with straightforward side effects.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description's mention of 'note about having cooked it' maps well to the schema fields (message, subject, timestamp), but it doesn't add any new meaning or format hints beyond what the schema already provides.

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 'adds an entry' and the resource 'recipe's timeline', with a specific use case ('note about having cooked it and how it turned out'). It distinguishes from siblings like set_recipe_last_made by naming it, though the overall sibling list is large and the line between this and list_recipe_timeline is implied rather than explicit.

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 explicitly pairs the tool with set_recipe_last_made for sorting purposes, providing a clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use signal. This is exemplary guidance in a complex toolset, helping the agent choose between related timeline operations.

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