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

Goes well beyond the annotations by disclosing link lifetime (24 hours), idempotency behavior (repeated calls return the same link while valid, a new one after expiry), who completes payment (the customer, via checkout_url), that Stripe handles billing address, VAT ID and taxes, and the irreversibility of the order after the call — which corroborates destructiveHint=true rather than contradicting it.

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 action and its return value are front-loaded, followed by preconditions, then behavioral guarantees, then the irreversibility warning. Every sentence carries distinct operational information with no padding.

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?

With only one fully documented parameter and no output schema, the description closes the remaining gaps by naming the returned artifact (checkout_url) and its lifetime, and by flagging the irreversible state change. An agent can call this correctly and warn the user appropriately.

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 description coverage is 100%; order_id is already documented with a format example, so the description cannot add much parameter-level meaning. It only reinforces the provenance of order_id ('returned by prepare-order-tool'), which the schema already states. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

Opening sentence states a specific verb and resource ('Send a prepared order to checkout and return the payment link'), which immediately separates it from prepare-order-tool, which only prepares. An agent knows exactly what this tool produces without opening the schema.

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?

Explicit preconditions are given: call only after the customer has seen the prepare-order-tool summary and explicitly confirmed, and all questions must be answered first. The alternative (prepare-order-tool) is named along with the condition that must be satisfied before moving to this tool.

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