List cookbooks

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description is not required to emphasize safety. The description adds valuable context that cookbooks are saved filters (not fixed sets), which informs the agent about the dynamic nature of the data. No other behavioral traits (e.g., pagination defaults) are mentioned, but the added insight justifies a score above baseline.

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 extremely concise: two short sentences that deliver the core purpose and a key conceptual detail. No filler or redundant information.

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 moderate complexity of sibling tools and the absence of an output schema, the description provides the essential conceptual clarification about cookbooks along with the core listing function. It does not detail return structure or pagination behavior, but for a list tool with clear parameters, this is reasonably complete.

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 clear descriptions for page and per_page, so the baseline is 3. The description does not repeat or add further meaning to the parameters, which is acceptable given the schema already explains them sufficiently.

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 'Lists the cookbooks of the household' with a specific verb and resource, and distinguishes the tool by explaining that a cookbook is a saved filter, not a fixed recipe set, setting it apart from other list tools.

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 does not explicitly guide when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_cookbook or search_recipes. While the nature of listing all cookbooks is implied, no direct comparison or exclusion criteria are provided for the agent.

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