cookwith-mcp

generate_recipe

Generate a recipe from natural language instructions, specifying dietary restrictions, allergies, and nutritional targets.

Instructions

Generate a new recipe based on natural language instructions

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "prompt": "<prompt>"
    },
    "name": "generate_recipe"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`prompt`	Yes	Natural language description of the desired recipe
`dietaryRestrictions`	No	Dietary restrictions
`allergies`	No	Ingredients to avoid
`calories`	No	Target calories per serving
`protein`	No	Target protein in grams
`servings`	No	Number of servings (1-20)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Jun 10, 2026

TDQS

C2.8/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden but only says 'generate a new recipe'. It does not disclose creation side effects, persistence, output format, or required permissions, leaving significant behavioral ambiguity.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single sentence, which is concise. However, it sacrifices informativeness for brevity, lacking structure or prioritization of key information.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a tool with 6 parameters and no output schema, the description is inadequate. It fails to explain what the generated recipe contains, how to interpret the output, or error conditions. The presence of many optional nutritional parameters is not contextualized.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema's parameter labels; it does not explain how parameters interact or provide context for using optional fields like dietary restrictions.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states the verb 'generate' and the resource 'recipe', clearly indicating it creates new recipes. It implicitly distinguishes from the sibling 'transform_recipe' which would modify existing recipes, but does not explicitly differentiate.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus the sibling 'transform_recipe'. The description simply repeats the purpose without contextualizing when to choose this generation over transformation.

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

Deploy Server