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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world behavior. The description adds useful context by saying 'Saves nothing' and enumerating the result fields, which matters because no output schema exists; it does not cover auth or error behavior.

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?

A single dense sentence front-loads the core question and then lists returned values. It is compact with little waste, though the list of outputs makes it somewhat long.

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 read-only check with no output schema, the description is fairly complete because it explains returned values and the no-save behavior. It still omits usage guidance and parameter semantics, which are meaningful gaps for a nested-address tool.

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 50%, and the description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond saying 'to an address.' It does not explain the optional shop parameter, its find_shops linkage, or the nested address fields, leaving the schema to carry the limited documentation that exists.

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 states a specific check: whether a shop delivers to an address, plus delivery fee, thresholds, minimum order, other fees, and next delivery time. It is clearly more than a tautology, but it does not explicitly distinguish itself from siblings such as quote_order or validate_cart.

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?

No when-to-use guidance or exclusions are provided. Mentioning that calculation is the same as checkout implies consistency, but it does not tell an agent when to choose this tool over quote_order, validate_cart, or checkout-related siblings.

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