ecommerce_save_custom_recipe

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but it only says 'save'. It does not mention whether saving overwrites an existing recipe, whether updates are idempotent, what validation occurs, or what the response indicates.

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 short and without fluff, but it is under-specified rather than concise. Given the tool's complex nested input schema, a single tautological sentence is not an appropriately sized description.

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 tool has a nested schema, no output schema, no annotations, and no usage guidance, yet the description provides none of the needed context. It does not explain recipe semantics, step structure, save behavior, or how this relates to recipe execution tooling.

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 adds no meaning to the required 'recipe' parameter. The nested structure with id, name, steps, action, selector, and delayMs is left entirely to the agent to interpret from the raw schema.

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 'Save a custom macro recipe' is essentially a restatement of the tool name ecommerce_save_custom_recipe, adding only the word 'macro'. It does not explain what a custom recipe is or differentiate this save operation from siblings like ecommerce_run_recipe or ecommerce_list_recipes.

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 instead of related tools such as ecommerce_run_recipe or ecommerce_list_recipes. No workflow context, prerequisites, or exclusions are provided.

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