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

Annotations already declare this as read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, and closed-world, so the safety profile is well covered. The description adds useful scope about Morocco-specific policies and cash-on-delivery but does not add further behavioral details such as caching, freshness, or response characteristics.

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: one dense but front-loaded list of covered topics and one clear usage instruction. There is no wasted language.

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 simple, read-only policy lookup with a complete input schema and an output schema, the description is complete enough. It tells the agent what topics are covered and when to call it, leaving return-value details to the output schema.

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?

There is only one optional parameter, lang, and the schema fully documents it with an enum and default. The description does not mention language selection, so it does not add meaning beyond the schema, but baseline 3 is appropriate given 100% schema coverage.

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 specifies exactly what shop information is returned: delivery fees/times, free-delivery threshold, minimum order, cash-on-delivery, returns policy, and WhatsApp contact. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools that deal with products, categories, search, and gift ideas.

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?

It explicitly says to use this before telling a user how ordering, delivery, or returns work, giving a clear usage context. It does not name alternatives or exclusions, but the sibling set makes the separation obvious.

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