List Albert Heijn Receipts

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

With readOnlyHint already indicating a safe read operation, the description adds useful traits beyond annotations: receipts are always fetched live, never cached, and large sizes are fetched in 100-row windows. It stops short of explaining authentication or full return shape, but the added behavioral context is substantive.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the core listing purpose, followed by pagination and caching behavior. There is no filler and every sentence provides useful information.

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 list tool with two fully documented parameters and no output schema, the description covers return fields, pagination, and cache behavior well. Minor gaps remain around authentication requirements and explicit sibling routing, but the core calling context is complete.

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 page and size are already documented in the schema. The description adds that pagination walks the whole history and repeats the 100-row window behavior, but this is largely confirmatory rather than adding new parameter semantics 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 and resource: 'List in-store cash register receipts (kassabonnen)' and names the summary fields returned. It clearly implies a listing/summary operation, but it does not explicitly differentiate itself from the sibling tool ah_get_receipt_details.

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 does not state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention ah_get_receipt_details for full receipt details. The pagination and caching notes are behavioral details rather than usage guidance.

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