ah_remove_from_shopping_listRemove an item from the primary shopping list using its item ID. This keeps the list accurate by deleting unwanted products.
Remove an item from the primary shopping list by its item ID.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| item_id | Yes | Shopping list item ID |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.2.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=true, and the description's 'remove' is consistent with that. It adds the useful scoping detail that this targets the primary list rather than a favorite list, but says nothing about reversibility, error behavior for unknown IDs, or auth requirements. With annotations covering the safety profile, this is an acceptable but thin addition.
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 short sentence with the action and the identifier front-loaded and no filler. Nothing could be trimmed without losing meaning.
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 one-parameter destructive removal with annotations covering the safety profile and no output schema, the description is nearly complete. The only real gap is not indicating where item_id is obtained or what happens on failure.
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% for the single item_id parameter, so the schema already documents it. The description's 'by its item ID' merely restates the schema rather than adding format or source details, which is the expected baseline when the schema does the work.
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 (remove) and resource (item on the primary shopping list) plus the identifying key (item ID), so an agent can distinguish it from ah_add_to_shopping_list. It does not explicitly name siblings, but the 'primary shopping list' scoping is clear.
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 prerequisites, and no pointer to where item_id comes from (e.g., ah_get_shopping_list) or how it differs from favorite-list tools. The scope phrase 'primary shopping list' implies but does not state the boundary against favorite lists.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.