uber_eats_view_cart

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It explains the tool returns cart data for review purposes and previews that UUIDs will be needed for subsequent cart modifications, which is useful operational context. It doesn't mention auth requirements or whether the cart must be non-empty, but the read-only nature is implied by 'view'. Having an output schema also reduces the burden on the description.

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?

Two dense sentences with zero waste. Every element earns its place: what's returned, when to call it, and how to use the returned UUIDs. Front-loaded with the core purpose.

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 zero-parameter view tool with an output schema, the description is complete. It covers the return contents, temporal usage guidance (before checkout), and downstream usage pattern (UUIDs for quantity changes). The output schema handles return value documentation.

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, so there are no parameter semantics to explain. Per the rubric, 0 params receives a baseline of 4. The description effectively focuses on what the tool returns rather than parameters, which 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 it views the current cart and lists exactly what it returns: line titles, quantities, shopping_cart_item_uuid per line, and draft_order_uuid. This distinguishes it clearly from sibling tools like add_to_cart, remove_from_cart, and update_cart_quantity which are mutations.

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 explicitly says 'Call before checkout so the user can review' which provides clear temporal context for when to use this tool. It also instructs to 'use UUIDs when changing qty', pointing toward the sibling update_cart_quantity tool. It lacks explicit 'when not to use' guidance but the context is strong.

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