add_items

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only states it adds items but does not mention any side effects, permissions, error handling, or behavior on duplicates. This lack of depth leaves the agent underinformed about potential consequences.

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 extremely concise with two lines of text and a bulleted argument list. It front-loads the key point about batching and avoids any redundant or unnecessary sentences. Every word earns its place.

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 that an output schema exists, the description does not need to explain return values. It covers the essential usage instructions, but lacks details on error conditions or constraints. For the simplicity of this tool, it is mostly complete, but could mention what happens if a list does not exist.

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 description adds some context for the parameters: 'items: the items to add' and 'list_id: which list (from get_lists). Empty = the default list.' However, the input schema already provides descriptions for nested properties (name, unit, quantity). The description does not substantially exceed schema information, and schema coverage is 0% (meaning schema descriptions are not counted?), but the added context about list_id being from get_lists and default list behavior is helpful.

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 uses a specific verb ('Add') and resource ('items'), and clearly distinguishes from siblings like 'get_lists', 'get_items', 'edit_items', and 'delete_items'. It states the tool can add one or many items in a single call, which is a clear purpose.

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 advises to batch whole recipes and not loop, providing clear when-to-use guidance. It also mentions that list_id comes from 'get_lists', but does not explicitly exclude cases when not to use it. Overall, it gives sufficient context for appropriate usage.

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