get_delivery_slots

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the behavioral transparency burden. It clearly indicates a read-only listing operation and details the fields returned, including the meaningful `suggested` flag. However, it does not disclose edge cases such as behavior with an empty or missing cart, or confirm that no state changes occur.

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 compact and front-loaded with the core action and scope, then efficiently lists the returned fields in a readable format. There is no filler or redundant wording.

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 tool has no parameters and an output schema exists, the description provides sufficient context for correct invocation: it identifies the scope ('current cart'), the action (list slots), and the key fields, including the `suggested` default flag. Minor additional context about empty-cart behavior or required cart state could improve completeness, but it is not a significant gap.

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 has zero parameters, so parameter-level explanation is unnecessary. The description references the implicit 'current cart' context, which is the only relevant input, and that is handled clearly. Baseline 4 is appropriate for a no-parameter 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 uses a specific verb ('List') and a clear resource ('available delivery slots for the current cart'), making the tool's purpose immediately obvious. It also naturally differentiates from the sibling set_delivery_slot, since this tool is about reading slots, not modifying them.

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 implies when to use the tool — when you need to see available slots for the current cart — but it does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives like set_delivery_slot. This leaves usage guidance somewhat implied rather than explicit.

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