ah_remove_from_cartRemove a single product from the active Albert Heijn delivery order using its product ID to update the cart.
Remove a single product from the active Albert Heijn delivery order. Use product_id from ah_get_cart. To remove products from the shopping list, use ah_remove_from_shopping_list.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| product_id | Yes | Numeric product ID to remove |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=true, so the agent knows this mutates state. The description reinforces the single-item scope (versus ah_clear_cart) but says nothing about idempotency, behavior when the product is not in the cart, or whether the cart total recalculates. Adequate but not rich given the annotations carry the safety profile.
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?
Two tight sentences, zero filler. The primary action is front-loaded, with source and alternative following in descending priority.
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 single-parameter mutation with no output schema and annotations that already declare destructiveness, the description covers purpose, scope, input provenance, and sibling routing. Nothing an agent needs to invoke it correctly is absent.
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, but the description adds real value by stating where product_id comes from (ah_get_cart) rather than just describing its type. That provenance guidance is the only semantic detail an agent could get wrong here.
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?
Specific verb+resource ('Remove a single product from the active Albert Heijn delivery order') with an explicit scope qualifier ('single', 'active ... order'). It cleanly separates this tool from ah_remove_from_shopping_list and ah_clear_cart without the agent needing to open any 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?
Names the upstream data source ('Use product_id from ah_get_cart') and routes the agent to the correct sibling when the target is the shopping list rather than the cart. Both the when-to-use and the alternative are stated explicitly.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.