get_grocery_item_details

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the read-only behavior is covered. The description adds the 'menu_id fallback source for grocery cart adds' context, which is a useful behavioral note beyond annotations.

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-loading the main purpose and immediately providing the key distinction for restaurants. 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?

For a read-only details tool with no output schema, the description explains what is returned (pricing, options) and a special fallback behavior. It is largely complete, though could mention return format or single-item nature.

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 100% and each parameter is well-described. The description does not add new parameter-level details beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 it returns details (pricing, options) for a retail/grocery item and explicitly distinguishes from the restaurant counterpart via sibling mention. The verb 'get' and resource 'details' are specific.

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 advises to use get_restaurant_item_details for restaurants, providing a clear when-not-to-use. However, it does not compare to other sibling tools like find_items or build_grocery_list, though the purpose is distinct enough.

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