mcp-drizly

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool is for viewing, implying a read-only operation, but doesn't disclose any behavioral traits such as authentication needs, rate limits, or what happens if the cart is empty. This leaves significant gaps for an agent to understand how to use it effectively.

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, efficient sentence that front-loads the key information ('View the current shopping cart contents and totals') with zero waste. It's appropriately sized for a simple tool and every word earns its place.

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?

Given the tool's complexity is low (0 parameters, no output schema), the description is somewhat complete but has gaps. It lacks behavioral context (e.g., no annotations, no output schema to explain return values), which could hinder an agent's ability to use it correctly in all scenarios, especially without guidance on usage or alternatives.

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 0 parameters, and schema description coverage is 100%, so there are no parameters to document. The description doesn't need to add parameter semantics, and it appropriately doesn't mention any. This meets the baseline for a parameterless 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 clearly states the tool's purpose with specific verbs ('view') and resources ('shopping cart contents and totals'), making it easy to understand what the tool does. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'get_orders' or 'track_order', which might also involve viewing order-related information.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There are no explicit instructions on when/when-not to use it, nor any mention of prerequisites or alternatives among the sibling tools (e.g., how it differs from 'get_orders' or 'update_cart').

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