list_recipes

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

With no annotations, the description fully bears behavioral disclosure. It states the tool is public and lists the information returned (inputs, outputs, duration, CPU cost). No side effects or rate limits are mentioned, but none are expected for a read-only list operation.

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 concise at two sentences, with clear structure: first sentence states purpose and content, second sentence provides usage context. No unnecessary words.

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?

Given no parameters and no output schema, the description covers all necessary aspects: what the tool returns, its public nature, and its role before the 'craft' sibling tool. It is fully self-contained.

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 input schema has zero parameters, and schema description coverage is trivially 100%. The description adds no parameter info, which is appropriate. Baseline for zero parameters is 4.

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 tool lists craft recipes, specifying that each recipe includes inputs, outputs, duration per batch, and CPU cost. The mention of 'use it before `craft`' distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'craft'.

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 explicitly advises using this tool before 'craft' to pick a recipe and understand costs, and notes it is public with no session needed. While it doesn't list exclusions or alternatives, the context is clear.

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