Get cookbook

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description reinforces read-only behavior with 'fetches'. Additionally, it reveals that the tool returns recipes that the cookbook 'currently matches', indicating dynamic content at query time—a behavioral detail beyond the annotation.

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 only two sentences (16 words) and front-loads the core action and result. The second sentence efficiently clarifies input format. It avoids unnecessary details, though it could be more structured (e.g., bullet points).

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, the description partly compensates by stating it returns a cookbook and its matching recipes. However, it does not describe the structure of the response (e.g., fields of the cookbook object, pagination details for per_page), leaving some uncertainty for the agent about what exactly to expect.

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 both parameters (cookbook, per_page) having descriptions. The description restates that cookbook accepts slug or UUID, which adds no new semantics. For per_page, the description offers no additional context, leaving the schema to carry the meaning. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 action ('fetches'), the resource ('a cookbook'), and the outcome ('and the recipes it currently matches'). It also specifies accepted identifiers (slug or UUID), distinguishing it from siblings like list_cookbooks (which lists cookbooks) or get_todays_meals (which is unrelated).

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 implies usage (when you have a slug or UUID and need cookbook details with recipes) but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like list_cookbooks. No exclusion criteria or 'when not to use' guidance is provided.

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