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?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions requiring a valid SKU and returning a cart token, but fails to disclose behaviors such as what happens if the product already exists in the cart, whether quantity updates or errors, authentication requirements, or error handling for invalid SKU.
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 long with no wasted words. It front-loads the primary action and outcome, then adds a prerequisite and return value succinctly.
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 tool's simplicity (2 parameters, output schema exists), the description covers the main purpose and return value, but omits details on quantity behavior, error states, and authentication, leaving gaps for an agent to properly invoke the tool in all scenarios.
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%, meaning the description adds no detail about either parameter beyond mentioning 'sku' implicitly. The quantity parameter is completely ignored, and no additional meaning (e.g., valid ranges, defaults, or format) is provided.
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 action: 'Add a TitanStore product to your cart and receive a cart token.' It uses specific verb and resource, and distinguishes from sibling tools like checkout, confirm_payment, etc., which serve different stages of the purchasing process.
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 the tool is used before checkout by stating 'Returns cart_token needed for checkout,' but it does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives, nor does it provide when-not-to-use guidance or mention exclusions.
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 distinct purpose in the purchase flow: searching products, getting details, adding to cart, checking out, and confirming payment. No overlap in functionality.
All tool names follow a clear verb_noun pattern in snake_case (e.g., add_to_cart, get_product). Even 'checkout' is a standard verb that fits the pattern.
Five tools cover the core e-commerce workflow without redundancy. The number is appropriate for the server's purpose of handling basic store operations.
The set covers the essential purchase lifecycle from search to payment confirmation. Minor gaps like cart modification or order history are absent but not critical for a basic store.