Get Albert Heijn Favorite Lists (Mijn Lijstjes)

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already covers safety. The description adds that the result includes item counts, which is a small behavioral detail. It omits auth requirements, ordering, empty-list behavior, and whether list IDs are returned.

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?

One front-loaded sentence with no wasted words; the key resource and the returned detail come first.

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 zero-parameter read-only tool with no output schema, the description conveys the essential return content (favorite lists with item counts). It stops short of describing the return shape, such as whether list IDs are included, which downstream tools might need.

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?

The tool has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. There is nothing further for the description to document beyond the empty 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 specifies a verb ('Get'), a resource ('saved custom favorite lists'), and adds concrete examples ('Weekly Staples', 'Party') plus the returned datum ('item counts'). This distinguishes it from the sibling ah_get_shopping_list by referring to saved custom lists, though it does not explicitly name that sibling or state the difference.

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?

No when-to-use guidance, no alternatives, and no prerequisites are given. The description only states what it returns; it does not say when an agent should call this instead of ah_get_shopping_list or ah_check_favorite_list_item.

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