Select store

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

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint=false, openWorldHint=true, destructiveHint=false. The description adds real state context: this binds session scope and loads a live menu, and that the binding governs every later cart/order call — behavior the annotations cannot convey. It does not say what happens if a store is re-selected or whether the prior binding is replaced.

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?

Front-loaded with the binding action, then the downstream consequence. The bilingual restatement is a faithful translation rather than padding, but it does lengthen the definition without adding new information.

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?

No output schema exists, yet the description covers what is loaded (the live menu) and the lasting effect on session state, which is what an agent needs before calling. Missing only edge-case behavior such as re-selection or invalid storeCode handling.

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?

With one parameter at 100% schema description coverage, the schema already explains storeCode and its provenance from find_stores. The description restates the binding role of storeCode but adds no format or validation detail beyond the schema, so baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: bind the ordering session to one KFC China store by storeCode and load its live menu. That is clearly distinct from find_stores (which locates stores) and get_menu (which presumably reads a menu without binding session state).

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 establishes the sequencing contract — all subsequent cart and order operations target this store — implying this must precede cart_add/place_order. It does not explicitly name find_stores as the prerequisite, though the schema fills that in.

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