list_cart_guests

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds useful behavioral context beyond the annotations: only accountless guests tracked by Peckish are listed, same-name additions map to the same sub-cart, and logged-in participants are excluded.

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 front-loaded with the core distinction, then gives usage and exclusion details. It is compact, with every sentence contributing to correct tool selection.

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 simple read-only listing tool with two schema-documented parameters and annotations covering safety, the description is complete enough. It explains what is returned conceptually (guest names) and what is excluded, so no output schema is needed for correct invocation.

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 coverage is 100%, and both parameters are documented in the schema. The description does not add meaning beyond the schema for cart_uuid or intent, so the baseline score of 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 states a specific verb and resource: it lists the names of guests Peckish tracks on a group cart, and clarifies they are people without DoorDash accounts whose items the host added. It explicitly distinguishes this from real participants who joined with their own login and from show_cart.

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 gives explicit use cases ('answer who has ordered?' and 'check a name before adding again') and names the alternative behavior: real participants are not listed and their items show in show_cart. The conditions for selecting this tool versus show_cart are clear.

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