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

Annotations only flag this as destructive/idempotent; the description adds the crucial blast radius – removing a product deletes every cart line for it, both one-time and subscription, not just one line. It also states the signed-in-user cart scope and that an updated cart is returned, which annotations cannot convey.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the primary action, then the alternate mode, then the side-effect and return. No filler; every clause carries information an agent needs.

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?

Covers scope (signed-in user's cart), both modes, destructive blast radius, and the return value, while an output schema exists for the returned cart. Nothing material is missing for correct invocation.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds real meaning beyond the schema: it clarifies that product_id_or_slug removal acts on all matching cart lines (one-time and subscription), which the schema's 'product to remove' wording leaves ambiguous.

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?

States a specific verb (remove) and resource (product from the signed-in user's cart), plus a second mode (clear unavailable items). An agent can distinguish this from suppco_add_to_cart, suppco_update_cart_item, and suppco_get_my_cart without opening any schema.

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?

Gives a clear conditional for the remove_unavailable mode ('set remove_unavailable to true to clear items that are no longer available'), which covers two distinct use cases. It does not, however, name an alternative for partial edits (e.g., suppco_update_cart_item for quantity changes) or state when not to remove.

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