View cart

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. 'View' and 'current' suggest a non-mutating snapshot, but the description does not disclose behavior for missing, expired, or empty carts, nor whether any authorization is required. It does not contradict any annotations.

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 a single sentence that states the action, resource, and key requirement with no filler or redundant phrasing. It is 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 single-parameter, read-only tool this is nearly complete: it identifies the cart, the operation, and what is returned conceptually. The lack of an output schema means some detail about the format of 'contents and totals' is absent, but the essential calling context is present.

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 description coverage is 100% and the schema already explains that cart_id is 'The guest cart id returned by create_guest_cart.' The tool description mostly restates this connection without adding new parameter-level meaning, so a baseline score 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 uses a specific verb ('View') and names the exact resource ('contents and totals of a guest cart') plus the identifying mechanism ('by its cart_id'). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_guest_cart and add_to_cart.

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 usage after a guest cart has been created by referencing the cart_id returned by create_guest_cart. It does not explicitly state when to prefer this over alternatives or when not to use it, but the context is reasonably clear for a simple read operation.

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