update_buy_list

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full behavioral disclosure. It states that a quantity of 0 removes the row, that it's an absolute set (not delta), and that an API key is required. These are key behaviors. While it could mention idempotency or error states, the core behavior is well covered.

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 concise sentences with no wasted words. The first sentence states the purpose and key characteristic (absolute, not delta), the second adds the important effect of quantity zero and the sibling distinction. Very efficient.

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 three parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description effectively covers the tool's operation, key parameter behavior, and alternative. It could mention the return type (e.g., success/error indication), but the current information is largely sufficient for correct usage.

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 schema covers all three parameters with descriptions (100% coverage). The description adds extra semantic context by clarifying the quantity is absolute and the alternative tool for incrementing, which adds value beyond the schema. This justifies a score above the baseline of 3.

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 ('Set the absolute quantity'), the resource ('buy-list card+finish'), and explicitly distinguishes from the sibling tool 'add_buy_list' by saying 'not a delta' and 'Use add_buy_list to increment instead'. This provides specific verb+resource and sibling differentiation.

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 gives explicit guidance to use 'add_buy_list' for increments instead, which is an alternative. It also mentions the requirement of 'IWMM_API_KEY'. However, it does not specify when not to use this tool beyond the increment case, though the context is clear.

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