Upload Custom Recipe

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

With no annotations, the description does substantial work: it discloses that Thermomix settings/modes embedded in step text become real settings, that verbatim ingredient lines become links, and that modes are fetched from Cookidoo immediately before upload (an extra live dependency). It omits auth requirements and error behavior, which matters for a write operation with zero annotation coverage.

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?

Front-loaded with purpose, then prerequisite, then behavioral detail in priority order. The third paragraph is dense but every clause carries information; only the quoted example strings add slight bulk.

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?

Output schema exists so return values need not be described, and the single parameter is fully schema-documented. The description supplies the missing pieces an agent needs — the upstream dependency, the implicit side effects, and the live mode lookup — making the definition self-sufficient for a write tool.

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% for the single parameter, so the baseline is 3; the description goes further by establishing provenance — the string must be the validated output of generate_recipe_structure — which constrains the expected format beyond the schema's terse note.

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 ("Upload a custom recipe to your Cookidoo account") and clarifies the scope as creating a brand-new recipe from scratch, which separates it from update_custom_recipe_steps. The prerequisite relationship to generate_recipe_structure is made explicit, so an agent can place it correctly among siblings.

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 a clear precondition: call generate_recipe_structure first and pass the resulting JSON here. The "brand new recipe from scratch" phrasing implies the update sibling is a different tool, but no sibling is named as an alternative and no failure/exclusion cases are offered.

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