Remove a recipe from a shopping list

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

Annotations only indicate readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so the description adds valuable context: items shared with other recipes remain but with reduced quantity. This is a key behavioral trait beyond what annotations provide. It does not mention idempotency or error handling, but the core mutating behavior is well disclosed.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the main action and the critical nuance about shared items. There is no redundancy or fluff, making it efficient and easy to parse.

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?

The tool has an output schema, so return values are defined there. The description covers the essential behavior including the shared-item handling. It does not mention edge cases like a recipe not being present or the effect of servings_multiplier on shared items, but the core logic is complete enough for typical use.

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% and all parameters have descriptive schema entries. The tool description does not add additional parameter-specific meaning beyond what the schema already states, such as the format for recipe and list_id. The baseline of 3 is appropriate since the schema handles the parameter documentation.

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 verb ('Takes... back off') and the resource ('a recipe's ingredients from a shopping list'), and it differentiates itself from siblings like delete_shopping_list_items by explaining the nuance of shared items. It immediately conveys the core function.

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 when to use it (to remove a recipe's contribution) but does not explicitly name alternatives like delete_shopping_list_items or update_shopping_list_items. However, the distinction from add_recipe_to_shopping_list is implicit and the purpose is clear enough for an agent to select it appropriately.

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