List recipe comments

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so read-only behavior is clear. The description adds that it lists comments from other users, implying no destructive side effects. However, it does not disclose any pagination, ordering, or filtering behavior, or whether the user's own comments are included. The description complements annotations without contradiction.

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, very short sentence that directly states what the tool does. Every word is necessary; no superfluous content. It is 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 the tool's simplicity (one parameter, no output schema, read-only), the description adequately covers the basic purpose. However, it lacks details about the comment format, ordering, or whether deleted comments are shown, which may be relevant for the agent. It is minimally complete for the tool's complexity.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add any new information about the recipe parameter beyond what the schema description already provides (slug or UUID). The description adds no additional semantics or usage context for the parameter.

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 tool lists comments left by other users on a recipe, which is the specific resource. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from siblings like add_recipe_comment or delete_recipe_comment, but its purpose is clear.

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 when to use this tool (to view comments on a recipe), but provides no guidance on when not to use it or alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites such as the recipe needing to exist or the user needing to have the correct recipe identifier.

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