List pantry items to check what is already stocked before generating a shopping list. Returns pantry item names that are excluded from shopping lists.
List pantry items (excluded from shopping lists). USE WHEN: checking what's already stocked before generating a shopping list. Returns list of pantry item names.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.5.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
readOnlyHint=true already establishes the safety profile, so the description only needs to add nuance. It does: the parenthetical explains that pantry items are excluded from shopping lists (domain behavior not in annotations) and states the return shape ('list of pantry item names'), which matters since there is no output schema.
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?
Three short sentences, front-loaded with what the tool returns and scoped by an immediately following usage trigger. Every clause earns its place with no filler.
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 zero-parameter read tool with readOnlyHint and no output schema, the description supplies everything needed: the resource, the return shape, and the moment to call it.
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 tool takes zero parameters, so there is no schema surface for the description to compensate for; baseline is 4. The description correctly says nothing about arguments rather than inventing filtering options that don't exist.
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 ('List') and resource ('pantry items'), and adds a distinguishing scope note ('excluded from shopping lists') that separates it from cart/shopping-list siblings. An agent can tell it apart from update_pantry and generate_shopping_list 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?
The 'USE WHEN' clause gives an explicit triggering context (before generating a shopping list), which is genuinely actionable. It does not name exclusions or rival tools (e.g. get_household) explicitly, so it falls short of a full 5.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.