Get Cart

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the agent knows it's a safe read operation. The description adds behavioral context by specifying the returned components (totals, limited items, etc.), which goes beyond annotations. However, it could mention error conditions or data freshness.

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 that is front-loaded with the action and resource. Every word carries meaning; no extraneous content. Ideal 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?

Given no output schema and zero parameters, the description sufficiently explains what the tool returns (totals, limited items, etc.). It could be more complete by specifying the response format or data structure, but for the complexity level, it is adequate.

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?

There are zero parameters, and schema description coverage is 100%. Per guidelines, baseline for 0 params is 4. The description does not need to add parameter meaning since there are none, and it remains fitting.

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 uses a specific verb ('Fetch') and clearly identifies the resource ('current active cart') and its contents ('totals, limited items, unavailable data, and pricing notices'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like voila_add_cart_items and voila_remove_cart_items, which perform different actions.

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 use when needing the current cart state but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., voila_get_order_details for past orders). No exclusions or context triggers are provided.

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