Shopping list

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered; the description adds useful behavioral context by defining the inclusion rule (run out or at/below minQuantity) and the returned information (remaining count and suggested buy amount). It also implies run-out-first ordering, though it does not go further into formatting or sorting details, which is acceptable for a zero-parameter read 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 appropriately short and front-loads the core concept ('What to buy, run-out first') before explaining criteria and usage. The final 'Read-only' repeats an annotation already supplied, but the overall structure is efficient and easy to scan.

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 input parameters, no output schema, and annotations covering read-only/open-world behavior, the description provides everything needed: what is included, what the results contain, and how to follow up after purchasing. No material gap remains for an agent selecting and invoking this tool.

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 tool takes no input parameters, so there are no parameter semantics to clarify. The mention of minQuantity provides helpful meaning about the underlying inventory field even though it is not an input to this tool.

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 states a specific resource and scope: tracked consumables that have run out or are at/below their minimum, with remaining quantity and a suggested purchase amount. It distinguishes the tool from broader list/search siblings by its run-out filter and explicitly points to adjust_stock for the post-purchase update.

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?

It gives explicit usage contexts: answering 'what do we need?' and checking before a shop. It also names the alternative action after buying, adjust_stock with a positive delta, making the when/when-not boundary clear.

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