generate_shopping_list

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

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description is consistent with that while adding real behavioral substance: it aggregates quantities across recipes, computes pack sizes, flags expiring deals, and requires that recipes already exist. It does not cover pagination, error behavior, or what happens with duplicate recipes, but the added context is well beyond the annotation.

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?

Front-loaded with the core capability, then organized into USE WHEN / NOT FOR / prerequisite segments that are easy to scan. Dense but every clause carries routing or prerequisite value; no filler sentences.

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?

No output schema exists, but the description sketches the return shape (grouped by store, flagged expiring deals) and states the prerequisite, which is sufficient for a read-only aggregation tool. Minor gaps are pagination and handling of unknown recipe names.

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%, so all three parameters (people, recipes, excludePantry) are already documented in the schema, making 3 the baseline. The description reinforces that recipes drive the list but adds no syntax or format detail beyond the schema, e.g. whether recipe names are case-sensitive or fuzzy-matched.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('Deal-optimized shopping list from specific recipes, grouped by store') and immediately differentiates itself from siblings by scoping to chosen recipes and store grouping. An agent can distinguish it from score_recipes and plan_and_shop without opening any schema.

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?

Explicit USE WHEN with a concrete trigger phrase ('shopping list for Bolognese and Chili'), an explicit NOT FOR naming the alternatives (score_recipes, plan_and_shop), and a prerequisite pointing at add_recipe. Nothing is left to inference.

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