get_shopping_list

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only says 'Liest' (reads), which conveys a read-only operation, but this is already implicit in the tool name 'get' and adds no additional context about side effects, caching, auth requirements, or error behavior. The description does not go beyond the verb.

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, clear German sentence that efficiently communicates the tool's purpose and the contents of the shopping list. There is no wasted wording or redundant content.

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 is simple with no parameters and an output schema, so the description need not explain return values. It adequately covers the operation and resource contents, making it sufficiently complete for the tool's complexity.

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 has zero parameters and the schema is empty, which the description correctly reflects. Since there are no parameters to explain, the baseline score of 4 applies. The description adds no parameter information, but none is needed.

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 tool's action: 'Liest die Einkaufsliste' (reads the shopping list), and specifies the exact contents (recipes, ingredients, additional items). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like add_items_to_shopping_list and get_meal_plan, which involve different operations.

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 usage by indicating the tool reads the shopping list, but it does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives, nor does it mention any exclusions. The context of sibling tools suggests it is for retrieval, but the description itself lacks direct guidance.

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