List recipe timeline

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

The description adds context beyond the 'readOnlyHint' annotation by specifying what the timeline includes (events and notes). However, it does not disclose potential behavioral traits such as pagination behavior, ordering of events, or error handling (e.g., if recipe does not exist). The added value is moderate but not exhaustive.

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 sentence of 19 words that efficiently conveys the tool's purpose and content. It is front-loaded with the action and includes necessary detail without any filler. Every word earns its place.

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 that there is no output schema, the description partially explains the return value (events with notes) but omits key details such as whether the timeline is ordered, the structure of the response (list vs. paginated), and what happens when no events exist. The required parameter (recipe) is clear, but completeness is average.

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?

The input schema has 100% parameter description coverage, so the baseline is 3. The tool description does not add any additional meaning for the parameters (page, recipe, per_page) beyond what the schema already provides. Therefore it meets the baseline but does not exceed it.

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 'Lists' and the resource 'timeline of a recipe', detailing the types of events included (created, updated, cooked) and that notes are attached. This specificity distinguishes it from siblings like 'get_recipe' (which returns recipe details) and 'list_recipe_comments' (which returns comments, not timeline events).

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention when to avoid it, such as for creating events (use 'create_timeline_event') or for simple recipe info (use 'get_recipe'). The agent must infer usage from the name and context.

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