Add or remove pantry items so staples stay out of shopping lists after shopping; returns the updated pantry list.
Add or remove pantry items (excluded from shopping lists). USE WHEN: updating stock after shopping or noting staples you always have. Items are matched case-insensitively. Returns updated pantry item list.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| add | No | Items to add to pantry | |
| remove | No | Items to remove from pantry |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.5.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations only provide idempotentHint=true. The description adds that pantry items are excluded from shopping lists, items are matched case-insensitively, and the updated list is returned. It does not cover permission needs or whether removals are permanent, but it surfaces several behavioral traits 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?
Three tight sentences with the purpose front-loaded and a USE WHEN marker. Every sentence earns its place by adding purpose, usage, matching behavior, or return value.
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 simple two-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, usage, behavior, and return value. It does not address edge cases like overlapping add/remove or error handling, but those are minor for this tool.
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 the add/remove parameters are fully documented in the schema. The description adds semantic meaning by stating that items are matched case-insensitively, which goes beyond the schema's basic 'items to add/remove' descriptions.
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 and resource: 'Add or remove pantry items'. The parenthetical '(excluded from shopping lists)' distinguishes it from shopping-list tools, but no sibling alternative is named. Clear but not fully sibling-differentiated.
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 explicit usage context: updating stock after shopping or noting staples you always have. It does not state when not to use the tool or name alternatives like get_pantry, but the trigger condition is clear.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.