List tags, categories or tools

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description does not need to repeat that. It adds value by specifying that the output includes IDs and slugs, and that the items are 'defined in the group.' The description is consistent with the read-only nature.

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 concise sentences with no waste. The main action and purpose are front-loaded, and the connection to search_recipes is efficiently placed at the end.

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 5 parameters, no output schema, and a broad set of sibling tools, the description covers the essential purpose and relationship to search_recipes. It could mention pagination or sorting behavior, but the schema covers those parameters, so the description is adequate for selection and invocation.

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 does not add any extra detail about the parameters beyond what the schema already provides; it focuses on the output. No added value for parameter semantics.

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 that this tool lists tags, categories, or tools with their IDs and slugs, and explicitly distinguishes itself from sibling tools by highlighting that these are the values used for filtering in search_recipes.

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 that the output values are what search_recipes filters on, giving clear context for when to use this tool. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or compare it to other listing tools like list_foods or list_units.

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