list_shopping_items

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It declares read-only, describes the return type (array of ArticleDto objects) and the empty array edge case, and explains the listId parameter behavior in different modes (stdio vs HTTP). Missing details on auth or rate limits.

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?

Two sentences that are front-loaded: first sentence states purpose and read-only nature; second sentence provides sibling references and return type. Every sentence earns its place with no wasted words.

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 the tool's simplicity (one parameter, no output schema), the description covers purpose, usage, parameter details, return type, edge case (empty array), and sibling tool references. It is complete for its context.

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% with a description for listId. The description adds significant context: how to discover the list ID via 'list_lists', and the fallback behavior in stdio mode (env var) vs HTTP mode (required). This goes beyond the schema.

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 'list' and resource 'shopping items' with a required 'listId'. It clearly distinguishes from siblings like 'list_pantry_items' and 'add_shopping_item'.

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 explicitly provides alternatives: for pantry items use 'list_pantry_items'; to add items use 'add_shopping_item'. It also indicates read-only behavior, but does not explicitly state when not to use the tool.

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