get_shopping_list

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and 'Get' strongly implies a read-only operation returning the list and its items. It does not disclose what happens for a missing or invalid list or explicitly confirm that no modifications occur, but for a simple getter the verb and scope provide reasonable transparency.

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 lines: a clear front-loaded purpose sentence followed by a minimal Args entry. Every word contributes, with no redundant or filler content.

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 output schema covers return values, the single required parameter is explained with its source, and the scope is stated. For a low-complexity one-parameter read tool, nothing essential is missing.

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 only declares list_id as a string, but the description adds meaningful provenance: it is a shopping list ID obtained from get_shopping_lists. This compensates for the 0% schema description coverage by telling the agent where the value comes from.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('a shopping list') and explicitly scopes the result to include 'all its items', which distinguishes this from the sibling get_shopping_lists (which lists shopping lists). The operation is immediately clear.

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 Args note 'list_id: Shopping list ID (from get_shopping_lists)' implies a prerequisite: call get_shopping_lists first to obtain the ID. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over related siblings or mention any exclusions, so the usage guidance is only implied.

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