Workflow Shopping Reconcile Preview Tool

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It explicitly states that this tool 'will propose explicit shopping-item actions without applying them,' which is a crucial non-mutating behavior signal. This is clear and prevents an agent from assuming the tool commits changes.

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?

The description is two short sentences with no filler. It front-loads the core purpose, then gives the necessary input guidance and the critical non-mutation caveat. Every sentence earns its place.

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 the output schema exists and the input schema covers both parameters, the description is sufficiently complete for an agent to invoke this preview tool correctly. It clearly explains what the tool does, what input is needed, and that no changes are applied. It could be slightly richer by naming the corresponding apply tool explicitly, but the sibling list provides that context.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by clarifying that the product IDs are 'confirmed Grocy product IDs' corresponding to purchased items, which gives real-world meaning beyond the schema's terse 'confirmed apply items' phrasing. It does not need to restate the schema's parameter descriptions.

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 clearly states the tool's action ('Preview shopping-list removals and amount updates') and identifies the triggering context ('after a purchase'). The phrase 'without applying them' explicitly distinguishes this preview tool from the related apply tool, so an agent can understand its role immediately.

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?

The description gives a clear use context: after a purchase, with confirmed Grocy product IDs, to preview proposed shopping-item actions. It implies the agent should use this before applying changes, and the sibling name workflow_shopping_reconcile_apply_tool makes the alternative obvious, though it does not explicitly say 'use the apply tool to commit these changes.'

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