willys_plan_remove_recipe

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses important behavioral details: the needs are recalculated and items only required by the removed recipe disappear from the suggested basket. This goes beyond a simple 'removes' statement, giving users a clear picture of side effects.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the primary action, and includes a meaningful consequence. Every word earns its place; no redundancy.

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?

The tool is simple with two parameters fully documented in the schema. There is no output schema, but the description explains the behavioral outcome (recalculation and removal of exclusive items), making the tool's effect clear enough for an agent to invoke it correctly.

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 covers both parameters fully with descriptions ('Vilken plan behoven hör till' and 'Exakt receptnamn att ta bort'). The tool description does not add additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states the tool's function: 'Ta bort ett recept ur planen' (remove a recipe from the plan), using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like willys_plan_add_recipe and willys_plan_remove_ingredient by specifying it removes an entire recipe.

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 clearly implies when to use this tool: whenever a recipe should be removed from the plan. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the context is clear enough and there are no competing removal tools with similar semantics.

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