Køb forbrugsvarer

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

Annotations already declare the safety profile (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=false). The description adds genuine behavioral context beyond that: charging at today's sales price, that bestil:true lines route through procurement, and that they are only charged upon pickup.

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?

It is a single dense sentence with the primary action front-loaded and no filler. The semicolon-compressed structure is efficient, though a slightly more structured phrasing could improve scannability.

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 mutation tool with annotations covering the safety profile and partial schema coverage, the description covers pricing and the bestil nuance. It still leaves the agent without explicit routing against the many sibling order/hand-in tools, so it is adequate but not complete.

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 67%, and the key undocumented field 'bestil' is explained in the description (bestil:true → ordered via procurement, charged at pickup), which adds meaning the schema lacks. It does not elaborate the antal/vareId fields, but those are self-evident.

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 states a specific action ('Udtag til projektet' – withdraw for the project) at today's sales price, which conveys the consumption-registration purpose distinct from ordering siblings. It is somewhat indirect (the verb is 'udtag' rather than an explicit 'register consumption'), but an agent can grasp the core operation.

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?

There is no explicit when-to-use or when-not guidance, nor a named alternative such as lager_bestil or lager_aflever. The only conditional mentioned (lines with bestil:true) is parameter-level behavior, not tool-selection guidance.

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