ht_get_shopping_list

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

The readOnlyHint and openWorldHint annotations already establish this as a safe, external read, so the description's main add is that items are returned alongside the list header, which matters because there is no output schema. It says nothing about behavior for a missing or inaccessible listId, nor about pagination or auth requirements.

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 eight-word sentence with the scope stated up front and no filler. It is efficient, though the terseness leaves the reader with no additional context to work from.

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 two-parameter read tool with full schema coverage and clear annotations, the description covers the essentials and correctly notes that items are included. It omits error behavior and any note that listId must come from a prior list call, which would be useful for an agent chaining calls.

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%, and the view enum is documented in detail in the schema, including the differences between compact, full, and raw. The description adds no parameter meaning beyond that, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 names a specific verb and resource: "Read one Harris Teeter shopping list with its items." The word "one" distinguishes it from a listing operation, and "with its items" scopes what the read returns. It stops short of naming ht_list_shopping_lists as the sibling that enumerates lists.

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-to-use guidance. The only routing hint is implicit in "one" versus a list operation, and the pointer to ht_list_shopping_lists appears in the schema's listId description rather than in this description.

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