update_pantry

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

Discloses mutation (add/remove) and case-insensitive matching. However, no annotations exist, and description omits details like idempotency, error behavior on duplicate add or missing remove, and limits. Adequate but not fully transparent.

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 sentences with no waste. Front-loaded purpose, then usage guidance, then behavioral detail and return. Each sentence earns its place.

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 tool with two array params and no output schema, the description covers purpose, usage, behavior, and return. Could mention duplicate/missing handling, but overall complete for its complexity.

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 covers 100% of parameters with basic descriptions. Description adds value by explaining case-insensitive matching (relevant for remove) and the context that pantry items are excluded from shopping lists. Slightly above baseline.

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?

Description starts with 'Add or remove pantry items', clearly specifying verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like get_pantry (read-only) and generate_shopping_list (different purpose) by noting pantry items are excluded from shopping lists.

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?

Explicitly states 'USE WHEN: updating stock after shopping or noting staples you always have', providing clear usage context. Does not explicitly mention when not to use or alternatives, but the guidance is sufficient for typical scenarios.

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