update_shopping_list_item

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only mentions that checked status can be used 'to mark items as purchased,' but it does not state whether updates are partial or full, what happens if the item does not exist, or if any permissions are required. This is a significant gap for a mutation tool.

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, front-loaded sentence that immediately states the action and lists key fields. It is appropriately sized with zero waste, earning a top score for conciseness.

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 simple update tool with no output schema, the description covers the core purpose but omits important context such as whether updates are partial (only fields provided are changed) and whether at least one mutable field must be specified beyond itemId. This leaves some ambiguity for an agent, so it is minimally viable but not rich.

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 schema already provides 100% parameter descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The description adds slight semantic value by explicitly linking 'checked' to 'mark items as purchased,' but overall it mostly restates the modifiable fields without deeper insight beyond the schema.

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 clearly states 'Update a shopping list item' with a specific verb and resource, and enumerates the modifiable fields (quantity, note, checked status). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like add_shopping_list_item and delete_shopping_list_item, making the purpose unmistakable.

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 usage context: use when you need to modify an existing shopping list item's quantity, note, or checked status. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the context is clear enough that an agent can infer when this tool is appropriate versus adding/deleting items.

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