set_recipe_ingredients

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

There are no annotations, so the description bears full responsibility. It discloses that ingredients are stored verbatim and that the user can later re-parse them, but does not mention side effects (e.g., overwriting), permissions, or whether the operation is reversible.

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 two sentences plus a code example, very concise and front-loaded with the main action. No superfluous 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 has two parameters, no output schema, and no annotations. The description explains the purpose and the ingredients parameter well, but omits details about the 'slug' parameter, return value, and prerequisites (e.g., recipe existence). It is adequate but not fully comprehensive.

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 schema provides no parameter descriptions (0% coverage). The description explains the format of 'ingredients_json' with an example, adding value, but does not describe the 'slug' parameter. Compensation is partial.

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 the tool replaces a recipe's ingredient list with given lines, using a specific verb and resource. It indirectly distinguishes from sibling 'set_recipe_ingredients_parsed' by emphasizing that ingredients are stored verbatim, but lacks explicit differentiation.

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 related tools like 'set_recipe_ingredients_parsed' or 'parse_recipe_ingredients'. It only explains the input format without contextual usage advice.

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