get_list_items

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

It discloses that the result includes both items still to buy and recently purchased ones, and that each item carries a uuid usable by sibling mutation tools. Since no annotations are provided, this behavioral context is valuable. It stops short of explicitly confirming the operation is read-only or mentioning permission requirements, but the 'Get' framing and return-focused wording cover the essential behavior.

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 compact and front-loaded with the core purpose, then organized with an Args section. Every sentence adds meaningful information: the return scope, the list parameter behavior, and the uuid handoff. There is no filler or repetition of the schema.

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?

For a read-style tool with one optional parameter and an output schema, the description covers the essential call contract: parameter format, default behavior, return scope, and uuid semantics. It leaves out minor edge cases such as list-not-found errors, but the output schema covers return structure. It is sufficiently complete for reliable invocation.

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 provides only the parameter title 'List' with a default of null and no description. The description fully compensates by explaining that the list parameter can be a name or uuid and that omitting it uses the BRING_LIST default. This gives the agent everything it needs to correctly set the parameter.

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 verb and resource: 'Get the items on a shopping list.' This distinguishes it from siblings like get_lists, which retrieves lists, and add_item/remove_item/complete_item, which mutate items. The tool's role as a retrieval operation for list items is unmistakable.

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 the tool is for reading items and then passing their uuid to remove_item or complete_item, and it notes that the list argument can be omitted for a default. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over get_lists or the mutation tools, nor does it give exclusion conditions. Usage context is implied rather than fully spelled out.

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