Clear shopping list

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

With destructiveHint=true, the description adds valuable scope detail: by default only checked-off items are removed, while include_unchecked extends removal to everything. This clarifies what will be destroyed, which goes beyond the annotation. It does not mention irreversibility or confirmation steps, but the destructive annotation already signals that risk.

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 one sentence and front-loads the primary behavior. 'Optionally needs include_unchecked' is slightly awkward and could be misread as a requirement, but overall the text is compact and skimmable.

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 destructive clear action, the description conveys the essential behavior and the parameter that escalates scope. An output schema exists, and the input schema covers all parameter semantics, so nothing critical is missing. The main weakness is the imprecise phrasing around include_unchecked.

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%, so the schema already documents all parameters. The description adds modest behavioral meaning for include_unchecked by tying it to the 'or everything if asked' option, but does not add further insight for dry_run, member, or idempotency_key.

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 and resource: 'Removes checked-off items from the shopping list.' It also distinguishes the default behavior from the include_unchecked path, so an agent understands the core function. It does not explicitly differentiate this from check_off_shopping_item, but the purpose is clear enough.

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 checked-off items need to be removed, and optionally all items if include_unchecked is set. It does not explicitly mention alternatives like check_off_shopping_item or state exclusions, so the guidance is mostly inferred rather than explicit.

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