Add a TitanStore product to your cart and receive a cart token. Requires a valid SKU. Returns cart_token needed for checkout.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| sku | Yes | ||
| quantity | No |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses the prerequisite (valid SKU) and return value (cart_token), but does not explain side effects (e.g., whether it overwrites the cart), auth requirements, or error handling. This is adequate but lacks depth.
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 two sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose, and contains no extraneous information. Every sentence adds value.
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 output schema exists, the description focuses on input and outcome. It explains the cart token needed for checkout, connecting to sibling tools. It could mention that quantity is optional, but overall is sufficient for a simple add-to-cart operation.
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. It explains the 'sku' parameter by stating it must be valid, but does not mention 'quantity' (which has a default). This adds partial clarity but leaves a gap.
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 'Add a TitanStore product to your cart and receive a cart token', which specifies the action (add) and resource (cart). It also distinguishes from siblings like checkout and search_products by focusing on adding items before checkout.
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 mentions 'Requires a valid SKU', which provides a prerequisite. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like checkout or search_products, leaving some guidance implied.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: product search, product detail retrieval, cart addition, checkout initiation, and payment confirmation. No two tools overlap in functionality.
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern with snake_case (e.g., add_to_cart, get_product, search_products). No mixing of conventions or ambiguous verbs.
With 5 tools, the set is well-scoped for a simple e-commerce flow. Each tool earns its place, covering product discovery, cart management, and checkout without unnecessary bloat or gaps.
The core purchase workflow is complete: search, get product, add to cart, checkout, confirm payment. Minor gaps include lack of cart viewing or removal, but the essential path is covered.