get_shopping_list

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

With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility for behavior. It explains the response format (each line, store assignment, aisle, array item_ids due to ingredient merging, and recipe_ids), disclosing non-obvious traits like null store_id semantics and the array nature of item_ids.

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 a focused paragraph that front-loads the purpose and then adds essential structural details without redundancy. Every sentence contributes meaning—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?

For a getter with no parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description fully equips the agent to interpret the result. It covers the line structure, store/aisle fields, the array nature of item_ids, and recipe_ids—nothing essential 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?

The tool takes zero parameters, so the schema is trivially complete. The description adds no parameter-specific details (none exist), meeting the baseline for a parameterless tool.

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 opens with a clear verb-resource pair ('Read the shopping list') and then details the structure of each line, making the tool's function unambiguous. It is distinct from sibling write tools (add/update/remove_shopping_list_items) by its read-only intent.

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?

Usage is implied: it's a getter, so it's for viewing the shopping list. However, it never explicitly contrasts itself with the mutating siblings or states when not to use it, leaving the agent to infer the appropriate context from the name and description.

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