add_to_cart

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does not disclose side effects (e.g., whether items are appended or merged, or if the cart must exist), nor does it mention required preconditions or error behavior. The tool mutates state, but this is not emphasized beyond the verb 'Add'.

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 extremely concise—a single sentence front-loaded with the key action and context. However, it might be too sparse, missing details that could fit without harming conciseness. Still, it earns its place with no redundancy.

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 simple tool and rich siblings, the description covers the minimum but omits return behavior (e.g., updated cart or confirmation), error handling, and any note on prerequisite steps (like having an active cart). An output schema is absent, so additional context would improve completeness.

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%, with each parameter described in the schema. The description adds no extra meaning beyond 'Add a KFC menu item'; it does not elaborate on parameter formats, valid values, or how customizations interact with items. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 action ('Add'), the resource ('a KFC menu item'), and the context ('to the current order cart'). It effectively distinguishes this tool from siblings like checkout, find_locations, and search_menu by focusing on adding an item to the cart.

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 when the user wants to add an item to the cart, but it does not provide explicit guidance on when to use versus not use this tool (e.g., potential need to search_menu first or check cart status). No alternative tools are mentioned.

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