Get Recipe Details

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden and does disclose the auth prerequisite and the useful interop fact that own-recipe steps come back in the notation update_custom_recipe_steps accepts. It leaves out error behavior for invalid or foreign IDs, so it falls short of full disclosure.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the verb, resource and returned fields, followed by ID provenance and the auth prerequisite in priority order. No filler.

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?

A read-only single-parameter tool with an output schema, so return values need not be explained. Between the ID format guidance, the sibling cross-references and the connect prerequisite, an agent has everything needed to call this 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 baseline is 3, but the description adds real meaning by giving two concrete ID formats and their sources, which the schema's generic 'The Cookidoo recipe ID' does not. It stops short of stating what happens when an ID of the wrong shape is passed.

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 specific verb and resource plus the exact payload returned (ingredients, steps, times) scoped 'by its ID'. This clearly separates it from the sibling search_recipes and list_my_recipes, which produce IDs rather than details.

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?

Gives explicit provenance for the recipe_id (from search_recipes for catalogue recipes, from list_my_recipes for own recipes) and states the required precondition: connect_to_cookidoo must be called first. That is when-to-use plus a prerequisite, not just implied context.

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