create_shopping_list

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full disclosure burden. It usefully states the new list will be empty, but says nothing about duplicate-name handling, permissions, whether creation overwrites anything, or idempotency — the failure modes an agent most needs to know about for a create operation.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler. It is perhaps too terse given the 0% schema coverage, but it is efficient rather than padded.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and the single required parameter is simple. However, for a create tool with no annotations and an undocumented parameter, the description leaves duplicate-name behavior and post-creation state implicit.

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%, so the description must compensate for the undocumented 'name' parameter. 'Con el nombre indicado' merely restates the parameter name; no constraints on format, uniqueness, or length are given.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Crea una nueva lista de compra') plus the key qualifier 'vacía', which distinguishes it from add_to_shopping_list or get_or_create_shopping_list. It stops short of explicitly naming the sibling it is not, so it lands at 4 rather than 5.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this versus get_or_create_shopping_list or get_shopping_lists, both of which are plausible alternatives for the same intent. No mention of prerequisites or what happens if a list with that name already exists.

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