get_cart

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the transparency burden. It conveys that this is a retrieval operation, states the authentication requirement, and notes the optional refresh behavior. It does not specify potential side effects of refresh or error responses, but covers the main behavioral traits needed for safe invocation.

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 compact and front-loaded, with the core purpose in the first sentence and supporting return details/session requirement in the following sentences. Every sentence adds useful information without repetition or filler.

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 simple read tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description is complete: it names the resource, identifies the user/session context, details the returned cart components, and mentions the optional refresh. No critical selection or invocation context is missing.

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 already fully documents the single optional 'refresh' parameter, so the description's mention of optionally forcing a refresh does not add significant meaning beyond the schema. Baseline of 3 is appropriate given 100% schema description coverage.

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 opens with 'Retrieves the current shopping cart contents and summary for the authenticated user on Carrefour France,' using a specific verb and resource. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like get_last_orders and get_shopping_list by focusing on the active cart and listing cart-specific data elements.

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 clear context: use this to get the current cart for the authenticated Carrefour France session, optionally refreshing data. It does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternatives, but the scope is obvious enough for effective selection among siblings.

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