ht_get_cart

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful detail about what the response contains, but says nothing about empty-cart behavior, session/auth requirements, or how the 'estimated' subtotal is derived.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence that names the resource first and then the payload fields; nothing is wasted, though it could have used the remaining space for the view parameter or empty-state behavior.

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?

With no output schema, the description must convey return values, and it does so concretely (per-item fields plus subtotal). For a simple one-optional-parameter read tool this is nearly complete; only empty-cart and session-context details are 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?

Schema coverage is 100%, and the single 'view' enum parameter's trade-offs (compact vs full vs raw) are documented in the schema itself. The description contributes no additional meaning about the view parameter, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 (Show) and resource (the Harris Teeter cart) and enumerates the returned fields (quantity, name, size, price) plus an estimated subtotal. It is clearly distinct from the mutation siblings (ht_add_to_cart, ht_remove_from_cart, ht_update_cart_item) by being a read, though it does not explicitly name a sibling as an alternative.

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?

Usage is implied: call this to inspect the current cart's contents. There is no explicit when-to-use framing, no statement of prerequisites (e.g., an authenticated session), and no mention of how this differs from ht_get_checkout or ht_get_shopping_list beyond what the names suggest.

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