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

Goes well beyond annotations: explains the two-stage delivery model (digital immediate, physical after shipping), value floor requirement, and crucially that this only prepares an unsigned intent and nothing happens until signing and submission. This is exactly the kind of multi-step behavioral context annotations cannot convey.

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-loads the action, then the value constraint, then delivery semantics, then the sign/submit flow. Dense but no filler.

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?

Covers the mutation's consequences, the required follow-up workflow, and the delivery outcome. With no output schema, this is complete enough for an agent to invoke correctly.

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 100%, so baseline is 3, but the description adds real value by tying `value` to the cart total minimum and referencing view_my_cart. It also contextualizes `signer` within the signing flow. It does not explain `confirm_token` (irreversibility token) in the description, but the schema already does.

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?

Specific verb (Buy) and resource (everything in your cart), clearly distinct from sibling cart tools like add/remove/update_quantity and from view_my_cart. The agent can tell exactly what this tool does.

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?

Points to geode_market_view_my_cart for the cart total and to geode-local-signer/geode_submit_intent for the follow-up flow. It does not explicitly state when not to use it (e.g., for orders outside a cart) but the purchase context is clear.

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