get_week_planRetrieve the recipes planned for a Cookidoo week plan, optionally from a chosen start day. Connect to Cookidoo first to review upcoming meals.
Show the recipes planned in your Cookidoo week plan ("Meine Woche").
You must be connected first using connect_to_cookidoo.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| day | No | First day of the week to show, as YYYY-MM-DD (default: today) |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. 'Show' implies a read-only operation and the connection prerequisite is disclosed, but it does not explicitly state that the operation is non-mutating or describe any error behavior when not connected.
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?
Two tightly written sentences with no wasted words. The primary purpose is front-loaded, followed immediately by the required prerequisite.
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 description covers the core purpose and connection prerequisite, and an output schema exists to explain return values. The schema also fully documents the lone optional parameter, leaving only a minor gap around explicit read-only behavior and alternative selection.
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 100%, so the single optional 'day' parameter and its YYYY-MM-DD format are fully documented in the schema. The description adds no additional parameter meaning, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.
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: showing recipes planned in the Cookidoo week plan. The parenthetical 'Meine Woche' adds useful domain context, but the description does not explicitly differentiate it from siblings such as list_my_recipes or plan_recipe.
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?
Provides a clear prerequisite ('must be connected first using connect_to_cookidoo'), but does not explain when to use this tool versus alternatives like list_my_recipes or when a week plan might be empty. Usage is largely implied by the tool name and description.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.