APIbase

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It compensates well by enumerating the specific fields returned (ingredients, nutrition, price, etc.), but omits other behavioral traits like rate limits, caching behavior, or authentication requirements.

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, information-dense sentence that front-loads the action and efficiently lists return fields. No words are wasted; every clause serves to clarify scope or output content.

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 lack of an output schema, the description effectively compensates by listing approximately eight specific data fields returned. For a single-parameter lookup tool, this is functionally complete, though it could ideally mention response format or pagination.

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 the 'id' parameter fully documented as 'Spoonacular recipe ID (from recipe_search or by_ingredients results)'. The description mentions 'by ID' but does not add semantic meaning beyond what the schema already provides, warranting the baseline score.

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 provides a specific verb ('Get'), resource ('recipe details'), and comprehensive scope listing (ingredients, instructions, nutrition, etc.). It clearly distinguishes this lookup-by-ID tool from sibling search tools like 'spoonacular.recipes.search' and 'spoonacular.recipes.by_ingredients'.

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?

The phrase 'by ID' combined with the schema description ('from recipe_search or by_ingredients results') clearly implies this tool requires a prior search step. However, it does not explicitly state 'Use this after searching' or name specific sibling alternatives in the description text itself.

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