Scale a list of ingredients

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

The description adds meaningful behavioral detail beyond the annotations: quantities are recomputed server-side rather than by the site, and each scaled line reports a 'scaling' status (exact, adjusted for kitchen usability, or nothing to multiply). This aligns with the readOnly and idempotent annotations and gives the agent a clear model of the result.

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 three sentences, front-loaded with the primary purpose, then the parameter mode, then the key output behavior. Every sentence adds useful information with no filler or redundancy.

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 moderate-complexity tool with a rich input schema, an output schema, and strong annotations, the description covers the essential operational context: what to pass, the mutually exclusive modes, server-side computation, and the meaning of the output's scaling field. Nothing critical is missing for an agent to invoke it correctly.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all four parameters. The description reinforces the factor-vs-servings-pair exclusivity and explains the output statuses, but it does not add new parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema's factor description already states.

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 title and description clearly identify the operation as scaling a list of ingredient lines to a different number of servings. The resource ('a list of ingredient lines') and verb ('scale') are specific, and the tool is clearly distinct from sibling list/search/get tools.

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 explains the main usage context: take a list of ingredient lines and convert it to a different number of people. It also clarifies the mutually exclusive calling modes (factor vs. servings pair), but it does not explicitly discuss when not to use the tool or compare it to alternatives.

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