octane_load_recipe

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses that it returns command sequence and asset paths, but lacks details on side effects, authorization needs, error handling, or behavior on invalid slug.

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?

Single clear sentence with no wasted words. Front-loaded with action and resource, then specifies included content.

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?

The tool is simple (single param, output schema present). Description adequately covers input and output content. Could mention error cases or prerequisites, but overall sufficient for a straightforward load operation.

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 0% (no parameter descriptions in schema). The description adds minimal value by mentioning 'by slug' but does not explain slug format, constraints, or default behavior. Baseline for low coverage is higher, but description fails to compensate.

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 action (load), resource (checked-in recipe), key identifier (slug), and what is included (command sequence and resolved asset paths). It distinguishes from siblings like octane_queue_recipe and octane_recipe_book.

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 usage for loading a recipe but provides no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. No alternatives are mentioned, though sibling tools suggest distinct use cases.

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