agent_cart_get

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It only states the basic get operation and gives no detail on side effects, permissions, error handling, or whether the cart is modified. The verb 'Get' implies read-only, but nothing else is disclosed about the tool's behavior beyond what the name already suggests.

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, direct sentence with no filler or redundancy. Every word ('Get agent cart summary by cart_id') adds value and the key information is front-loaded.

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?

The tool has one required parameter and no output schema, so the description should explain what the response likely contains or when the tool should be invoked. It only says 'cart summary' without defining what that includes, and it gives no usage context relative to the checkout or add-to-cart siblings. This leaves gaps for an agent trying to understand expected inputs and outputs.

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 has no description for cart_id (0% coverage), and the description adds minimal meaning by saying 'by cart_id', indicating the parameter is the identifier of the cart to retrieve. However, it doesn't clarify expected format, length, or any constraints. This is just enough to compensate for the missing schema documentation, but not rich.

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 ('Get') with a clear resource ('agent cart summary') and identifies the key parameter ('cart_id'). This makes the tool's basic function clear. However, it does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tools like agent_cart_add, relying on the verb and name to convey the difference.

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?

No guidance is provided for when to use this tool versus alternatives. The sibling list includes agent_cart_add and checkout_* tools, but the description doesn't explain that this is for retrieving a cart summary before adding items or proceeding to checkout. The intended usage context is left entirely to inference.

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