Взять из холодильника

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses a key behavioral trait: without quantity, it removes everything. This is important destructive behavior. However, it doesn't mention what happens if the product is not found or if quantity exceeds available stock, leaving some ambiguity.

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 only two short sentences, both informative. No wasted words; it effectively conveys purpose and key behavior.

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?

The tool is simple (2 params, no output schema) and the description covers the main purpose and the critical quantity-default behavior. It doesn't address edge cases like product not found or error handling, but for a basic removal tool this is likely sufficient.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add significant meaning beyond the schema, as the 'without quantity removes all' behavior is already in the quantity parameter description.

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 the action: 'Убирает продукт из холодильника' (removes a product from the fridge) and provides context ('съели / выкинули' – ate/threw away). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list, add, check, and expiring.

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 implies when to use the tool (when removing an item, e.g., eaten or thrown away) and clarifies the default behavior if quantity is omitted. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but for a simple removal tool the usage context is clear.

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