Set last made

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so the write nature is covered. The description adds that the value is displayed and used for sorting, which is useful context. It doesn't mention overwrite semantics or permission requirements, but with annotations present the description contributes enough to warrant a 3.

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 exactly two sentences, front-loaded with the primary action, and the second sentence adds meaningful context about visibility and sorting. No wasted words or redundant details.

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?

For a simple setter with two fully documented parameters and adequate annotations, the description covers purpose and effect. It doesn't discuss error behavior or overwriting, but that is not a significant gap for this low-complexity tool. Could be slightly more explicit, but it is essentially 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 description coverage is 100%, and both parameters (recipe, timestamp) have detailed descriptions including formats and examples. The description itself adds no parameter-specific meaning, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 uses a specific verb ('Records') and clearly names the resource ('when a recipe was last cooked'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like set_recipe_rating by targeting the last-made timestamp, and adds the downstream effect of showing and sorting in Mealie.

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 gives clear context: record when a recipe was last cooked, and notes the consequence ('Mealie shows this on the recipe and sorts by it'). It doesn't explicitly name alternatives or exclusion cases, but the intended use is obvious from the text.

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