remove_meal

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses the key behavior (quantity set to 0 rather than deletion) and notes that profile is optional if only one profile is configured, which is useful. However, it does not mention edge cases such as what happens when the meal is not in the cart or whether removal is reversible via re-adding.

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 well-structured with an Args/Returns layout. It front-loads the core behavior and then lists parameters concisely. Slight overhead from the Returns section, which only says a confirmation is returned, but acceptable.

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 mutation tool with no annotations, the description covers the main safety-relevant behaviors and parameter meanings. It lacks details about what the confirmation contains, error cases, and whether removal affects an active order or only unconfirmed carts, but the core usage is covered.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains serve_date format, menu_line_id meaning (8=GS1, 9=GS2, 10=GS3), profile optionality, and menu_group_id default, which adds significant value beyond the raw schema.

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 ('Remove a meal from the shopping cart') and the mechanism ('set quantity to 0'), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like add_to_cart and confirm_order. It lacks a title but the description itself is specific enough to identify the resource and operation.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like add_to_cart or get_cart_status. The description implies it's for removing meals, but does not mention prerequisites, idempotency, or when removal is appropriate.

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