Remove Jumbo Shopping List Items

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=true, so the bar is lower; the description nonetheless adds that this WRITES to the user's real Jumbo account, emphasizing real-world irreversibility. It does not explain what happens to item state or whether removal can be undone, so it adds useful context but not rich detail.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the action and scope, with zero filler. Every clause carries useful information (id provenance, write warning, scope limit).

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 single-parameter mutation with no output schema, the definition covers action, id source, scope, and the write-to-real-account warning, while annotations cover the destructive profile. Nothing material an agent needs to invoke it correctly is missing.

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 single well-described param, so the baseline is 3. The description adds provenance beyond the schema by stating the ids originate from jumbo_get_shopping_list, which tells the agent how to obtain valid values.

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) plus resource (shopping list items) and scope ('Shopping list only'), which cleanly separates it from the sibling add/set tools. An agent can identify the operation without opening the schema.

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 names the upstream source of the ids ('ids come from jumbo_get_shopping_list'), giving a clear workflow cue, and constrains usage with 'Shopping list only'. It stops short of stating when not to use it or naming alternatives explicitly, so it is clear context but not full routing guidance.

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