mcp_howtocook_recommendMeals

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but lacks behavioral details. It mentions '智能推荐' (intelligent recommendation) but doesn't disclose how recommendations are generated, whether they're personalized, what timeframes are considered, or what format the output takes. For a planning tool with zero annotation coverage, this leaves significant behavioral gaps.

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, efficient Chinese sentence that front-loads the core functionality. Every element ('根据用户的忌口、过敏原、人数', '智能推荐菜谱', '创建一周的膳食计划', '以及大致的购物清单') earns its place by specifying inputs and multiple outputs without redundancy.

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?

For a 3-parameter planning tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It outlines the high-level purpose but lacks crucial details about how the tool behaves, what the outputs look like, how recommendations are tailored, or any limitations. The agent would struggle to use this effectively without trial-and-error.

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%, so the description must compensate but adds minimal parameter semantics. It mentions '忌口' (avoidItems), '过敏原' (allergies), and '人数' (peopleCount) which map to the three parameters, but provides no details about expected formats (e.g., string arrays for allergies), constraints, or how they influence recommendations. The description doesn't adequately compensate for the complete lack of schema documentation.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose with specific verbs ('智能推荐菜谱', '创建一周的膳食计划', '创建大致的购物清单') and resources ('菜谱', '膳食计划', '购物清单'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'getAllRecipes' or 'getRecipeById' by emphasizing meal planning and shopping list generation rather than simple recipe retrieval.

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 description implies usage context through the mention of '用户的忌口、过敏原、人数', suggesting it should be used when dietary restrictions and group size are known. However, it doesn't explicitly state when NOT to use this tool or name alternatives like 'mcp_howtocook_whatToEat' for simpler recommendations.

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