add_pizza_with_toppings

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states the tool 'Handles proper product + topping configuration', hinting at validation or processing, but lacks details on behavioral traits such as error handling, permissions needed, whether it modifies an existing order or creates a new one, or any side effects like rate limits. This is inadequate for a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage.

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 brief and front-loaded, consisting of two concise sentences that directly state the tool's purpose. There's no unnecessary information, making it efficient, though it could be slightly more structured by explicitly separating purpose from context.

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 the tool has no annotations, no output schema, and involves mutation (adding a pizza), the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what the tool returns, error conditions, or how it interacts with other order-related tools. For a 4-parameter tool with complex configuration, more context is needed to guide effective use.

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%, so the schema fully documents all parameters (coupon_code, size, crust, toppings) with descriptions and defaults. The description adds minimal value by mentioning 'using a coupon code' and 'topping configuration', but doesn't provide additional semantics beyond what's in the schema, such as format details or usage tips.

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 the action ('Add a customized pizza with toppings') and resource ('pizza'), specifying it involves product + topping configuration. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'add_item_to_order' or 'create_order', which might handle similar order-related functions.

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 mentions using a coupon code, implying a context for discounts, but provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'add_item_to_order' or 'create_order'. There's no mention of prerequisites, exclusions, or specific scenarios for tool selection.

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