bar_get_ingredient

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only implies a read operation via the verb 'get' and adds no information about error handling (e.g., missing ID), permissions, or side effects; it merely restates the tool name.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence with no filler or repetition. It is appropriately sized for a simple retrieval tool, though the phrase 'detailed information' is generic and could be tightened.

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 output schema exists, so the description need not explain return values, and the tool itself is simple (one required parameter). However, with no annotations and 0% schema description coverage, the missing parameter semantics and usage routing leave a gap an agent must fill by inference.

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 description coverage is 0%, and the description does not mention the required 'id' parameter at all. It does not explain the expected identifier format or where to obtain a valid ID, so the agent receives no semantic guidance beyond the schema's bare property name.

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?

States a clear verb ('Get') and resource ('ingredient') with a scope qualifier ('specific'), so the agent understands this retrieves a single ingredient. It does not differentiate from sibling tools like bar_search_ingredients or bar_list_ingredients, which could also return ingredient information.

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 explicit when-to-use guidance, prerequisites, or alternatives are provided. The phrase 'specific ingredient' hints at retrieval by known identifier, but the description never says to use this instead of search or list, leaving the agent to infer from the name and schema.

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