get_extended_basket

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that authentication is required and details the exact data returned (products, prices, discounts, fees, taxes, cashback, final payable). It does not mention side effects or error behavior, but as a fetch tool, the core behavior is well covered. Slightly more context could be provided (e.g., whether it modifies anything), but it is still informative.

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 longer than minimal but every sentence contributes: the core fetch action, the detailed return fields, specific use cases, and the pointer to get_basket. It is front-loaded with the main purpose and stays on-topic, though a few redundant phrases (e.g., 'COMPLETE' and 'EXTENDED') could be trimmed. Overall well-structured.

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 no output schema and no annotations, the description adequately covers return content, use cases, and required authentication. It also differentiates from the sibling tool, making the context complete for an agent to choose and invoke correctly.

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?

The tool has zero parameters, so per the rubric the baseline is 4. The description adds no parameter-specific semantics, which is fine since there are none. It does clarify that the tool returns full details without needing inputs.

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 fetches the full basket with complete product details and an extended bill breakdown, explicitly distinguishing it from the lighter get_basket sibling. The verb 'Fetch' plus resource 'full basket (cart)' is specific and not a tautology.

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?

It explicitly lists when to use this tool (detailed cart view, checkout screen, showing product names/discounts, complete bill breakdown) and when to use the alternative (get_basket for quick checks like item count or basic total). This is model guidance with clear exclusions.

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