get_recipe_nutrition

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose any behavioral traits such as side effects, error handling (e.g., if slug is invalid), authentication needs, or rate limits. For a simple read operation, this is a significant gap.

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 very concise (one sentence), but it lacks structure. Important information such as parameter details or usage context is omitted. While brevity is valued, here it sacrifices clarity.

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?

Although there is an output schema (indicated in context signals), the description does not mention what the nutrition info contains (e.g., calories, macros). Given the tool's simplicity, more completeness would still be beneficial for proper agent decision-making.

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 has 0% coverage for the 'slug' parameter—no description is provided in the schema. The tool description also fails to explain what 'slug' means or how to obtain it. This leaves the agent with no semantic understanding of the required input.

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 ('Get') and the resource ('nutrition info for a recipe'). However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'get_recipe', which might also return some nutrition data. The purpose is clear but could be more specific about scope.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'get_recipe'. There is no mention of prerequisites, context, or when not to use it. The agent must infer usage from the tool name alone.

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