jumbo_remove_shopping_list_items

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does important work: it flags that this WRITES to the user's real Jumbo account – a critical disclosure for a destructive operation. It doesn't cover reversibility or auth requirements, hence not a 5.

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 compact sentences, front-loaded with the action and resource, with the write warning and scope constraint earning their place. No filler.

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?

Given a single-parameter mutation tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers action, source of ids, write semantics, and scope. It stops short of noting what happens on failure or which account is affected, but is nearly 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 coverage is 100% and the single parameter item_ids is fully documented in the schema, so the description needn't add param detail. The description does note ids come from jumbo_get_shopping_list, which is useful but minor; baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 (Jumbo shopping list items) with the identifier source. It clearly distinguishes itself from the inverse sibling jumbo_add_shopping_list_items and from read-only list tools like jumbo_get_shopping_list.

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?

Names the source of ids (jumbo_get_shopping_list) and scopes the tool to the shopping list only, giving the agent clear context. It doesn't state explicit exclusions or alternatives for edge cases, so it falls just short of a 5.

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