Albert Heijn: Order Details

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds value beyond that by disclosing the return contents (products with names, quantities, prices) and an output-handling convention: link product/recipe names to their url when mentioned. It stops short of noting empty orders or failure modes.

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 short sentences, each earning its place: what it does, what it returns, how to source the ID, and how to render the result. The core purpose is front-loaded and there is 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?

An output schema exists, so return-value structure need not be explained, and readOnlyHint covers safety. The description supplies the remaining context an agent needs: parameter provenance and the linking convention. Minor gaps (empty/nonexistent order handling) keep it from a 5.

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 description coverage is 100% and the single order_id parameter is already documented as 'Numeric order ID from ah_get_orders'. The description's provenance note largely restates the schema, so per the baseline rule a 3 is appropriate even though it is not misleading.

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 and resource ('Get the full item list for a specific Albert Heijn delivery order by its ID') and immediately clarifies the granularity, distinguishing it from the sibling ah_get_orders which lists orders rather than their line items. An agent can tell them apart without opening either 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?

Gives an explicit prerequisite chain: 'Get order_id from ah_get_orders', which tells the agent this tool must be preceded by the list tool and how to obtain the required parameter. It does not state any when-not conditions or error behavior, but the routing context is clear.

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