Add To OlaOla Account Cart

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

The description discloses important behavioral traits: it logs in with local credentials, adds a product (mutation), and requires confirmed=true. Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the full burden. It could mention whether the action is reversible or has rate limits, but the disclosure is adequate.

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 a single sentence, concise and front-loaded, covering the main actions. It avoids waste but could improve structure by separating parameters or adding a second sentence for clarity.

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 four parameters, no output schema, and the tool's complexity (authentication and mutation), the description is incomplete. It does not explain parameter roles, return value structure, or differentiate from sibling tools. Essential context is missing.

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 description provides no information about any of the four parameters (quantity, confirmed, variantId, productUrlOrSlug) beyond the required 'confirmed'. With schema description coverage at 0%, the description fails to compensate, leaving the agent without guidance on parameter usage.

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?

Description clearly states the tool logs into OlaOla, adds a product to the real account cart, and returns the updated cart. It uses specific verb-resource combination ('add to account cart') and mentions the return value. However, it does not explicitly distinguish from the sibling tool 'olaola_add_to_cart', which likely has a different scope.

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 specifies that 'confirmed=true' is required, implying a precondition. However, no guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'olaola_add_to_cart' or 'olaola_add_to_shadow_cart'. The context is implied but not explicit.

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