consumption-history

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, which the description does not contradict. It adds behavioral traits: sorted by most recent, pagination behavior (default 25, offset), and includes tasting context. This goes beyond annotations.

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 with no wasted words. It front-loads the purpose and filters in the first sentence, and details ordering/pagination in the second. Efficient and clear.

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?

Given the existence of an output schema, the description covers filtering, ordering, pagination, and tasting context. It does not mention potential rate limits or authentication, but these are not critical for a read-only tool. Overall sufficient for an agent.

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 coverage is 100% with each parameter having a description. The description adds minimal extra meaning, e.g., explaining pagination in more detail. Baseline of 3 is appropriate as the schema does most of the work.

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 specifies the verb 'Search' and the resource 'consumption history' (wines opened and drunk). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like search-cellar or purchase-history by focusing on past consumption, with specific filtering options.

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 states when to use the tool and provides context like 'Returns most recent consumptions first' and pagination details. It does not explicitly list when not to use or alternatives, but the presence of siblings implies use cases.

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