ze_get_cartRetrieve the active shopping cart to display items, quantities, and totals for order review or modification.
loadCart { cart { id } }. Field names other than cart failed GraphQL validation.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| privacy_mode | No | ||
| response_format | No | markdown |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.4Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already establish readOnly, idempotent, open-world, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds a small behavioral detail about GraphQL validation requiring the 'cart' field, but it does not disclose auth requirements, rate limits, or response behavior beyond 'id'.
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 very short, front-loaded with the query, and contains no filler. However, the validation note is cryptic and would benefit from more useful structure, so it is not perfect.
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 and 0% parameter documentation, the description is too incomplete for an agent to know what privacy modes mean, what format options produce, or what the full response looks like. It is minimally sufficient only for a trivial cart lookup.
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?
Input schema description coverage is 0%, and the description contains no explanation of privacy_mode or response_format. The GraphQL snippet refers to a 'cart' field, not to the two input parameters, so the description does not compensate for the missing schema descriptions.
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 title 'Inspect Zé cart' and the GraphQL fragment 'loadCart { cart { id } }' name a specific verb and resource, so the tool's purpose is clear. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tools, but the cart-inspection intent is unambiguous.
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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool instead of alternatives such as ze_checkout_preview or ze_clear_cart_items. Any usage rule is only implied by the tool's name and title, not stated.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.