add_plan

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavior, but it only explains input format. It does not mention side effects (e.g., whether items are appended or replace existing cart), prerequisites, or validation behavior. This is a gap for a mutation-like operation.

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 two short sentences, front-loads the action ('Bulk add items to cart'), and provides a concrete format example in the second sentence. Zero wasted words.

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 simple single-parameter tool with no output schema, the description sufficiently explains input format and overall intent. Sibling differentiation is weak, but the simplicity of the tool makes the description mostly complete.

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 coverage is 100% and the parameter description matches the tool description. The description adds no meaning beyond the schema's own 'items' string format, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 ('Bulk add') and resource ('items to cart'), clearly distinguishing it from siblings like 'remove' or 'cart'. The format details ('sku:cents' pairs) reinforce the tool's purpose.

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 word 'Bulk' implies use for multiple items, but no explicit when-to-use or alternatives are provided. Sibling tools like 'add' and 'cart' suggest different use cases, yet the description does not guide the agent on choosing between them.

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