transform_recipe

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It merely says 'transform or modify' without disclosing whether changes are destructive, whether a new recipe is created, or any side effects. This is insufficient for safe invocation.

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 a single sentence that is concise and front-loaded with the action. While it lacks detail, it is not verbose and efficiently states the core purpose.

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?

Given the complexity (nested recipe object, 5 parameters) and lack of annotations and output schema, the description is too vague. It does not explain what the tool returns, whether it modifies in place, or any constraints beyond the schema.

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% with each parameter having a clear description. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the field descriptions, so baseline 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?

The description 'Transform or modify an existing recipe' uses a specific verb and resource, clearly indicating it modifies existing recipes. It distinguishes from the sibling 'generate_recipe', which implies creation of new 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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus 'generate_recipe'. While the purpose implies modification, there is no statement about prerequisites, when not to use it, or alternatives.

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