generate_shopping_list

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses key behaviors: 'Aggregates quantities across recipes, computes pack sizes, flags expiring deals.' This is informative, though it doesn't mention whether state is modified or if any side effects occur. However, for a list-generation tool, this is sufficient.

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 three sentences, front-loading the main purpose, followed by usage guidance and exclusions. No wasted words.

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 18 sibling tools, the description covers purpose, usage, exclusions, and key behaviors. It adequately informs an agent when to use this tool and what to expect.

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 has 100% description coverage for parameters. The description adds meaning beyond the schema by explaining that the tool groups by store, aggregates quantities, computes pack sizes, and flags deals, which are not in the 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 starts with a clear statement: 'Deal-optimized shopping list from specific recipes, grouped by store.' It specifies the verb 'generate' (implied in name) and the resource 'shopping list', and distinguishes from siblings by stating 'NOT FOR: deciding what to cook (use score_recipes or plan_and_shop first).'

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 explicitly states 'USE WHEN: preparing to shop for chosen recipes' with an example, and provides clear exclusions: 'NOT FOR: deciding what to cook' with alternatives. It also notes a prerequisite: 'Requires recipes to exist (see add_recipe).'

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