get_cookbook_recipes

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does disclose that results are paginated via page and per_page, which is useful, but it does not mention return format, ordering, error behavior, authentication, or response shape. It does not contradict any annotations.

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 appropriately terse: one core sentence followed by a compact Args block. There is no filler, and the most important information is front-loaded.

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?

With no output schema and a large set of sibling tools, the description should clarify whether the response contains full recipe objects or summaries, and when to use this tool instead of search_recipes or get_recipe. It enables a basic call but leaves important selection and expectation gaps.

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 0% description coverage, so the Args block is essential and does compensate: it clarifies 'cookbook_slug' as a slug identifier, 'page' as a page number, and 'per_page' as results per page, including defaults. This is sufficient for the three parameters, though the explanations are minimal.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and a clear resource ('recipes in a cookbook'), making the operation easy to identify. It indirectly distinguishes itself from siblings like get_recipe, get_cookbooks, and search_recipes, though it does not explicitly contrast them.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus search_recipes, get_recipe, or get_cookbooks. The description is limited to an imperative statement plus parameter definitions, leaving selection entirely to inference.

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