Clear cart

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the mutability and scope profile is largely covered. The description contributes the useful detail that the removal is wholesale (every dish), but says nothing about idempotency, whether an empty cart is an error, or what state is returned.

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?

Two short, front-loaded sentences with the scope stated first. The Chinese sentence is a pure duplicate translation and adds no information a monolingual agent can use, which is the only waste.

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 zero-parameter mutation with annotations and no output schema this is close to sufficient, but the description never says what the call returns or what the cart looks like afterwards, which matters for a bulk clear.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so the schema has nothing to explain and there is no semantic gap for the description to fill. Baseline 4 applies for a parameterless tool.

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?

"Remove every dish from the cart" gives a specific verb (remove) and resource (cart) with a clear bulk scope (every), which distinguishes it in practice from cart_remove. It stops short of naming cart_remove or cart_set_quantity explicitly as the alternatives for partial removal.

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?

There is no guidance on when to prefer this over cart_remove or cart_remove-per-item, and no statement of prerequisites, confirmation, or side effects. The agent must infer usage entirely from the name and the sibling list.

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