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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description still adds real value by enumerating the returned sections and flagging that the buyer's delivery address is personal data — a meaningful PII/logging caveat an agent wouldn't otherwise know. Minor gap: no note on error or not-found 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?

One sentence plus an endpoint reference, with the key constraint ('by id') front-loaded and no filler. Every clause conveys distinct information about the payload or the identifier.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description must carry the return shape — and it does, naming the four main sections returned. The PII caveat covers the main agent pitfall. Slightly incomplete on not-found behavior and whether the payload is large (order items could be unbounded).

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% and the single parameter carries a pattern plus provenance ('from bol_list_shipments'). The description adds nothing about the id format or source beyond what the schema already states, 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+resource ('One shipment by id') and enumerates exactly what comes back: shipment date, order items, transport and track-and-trace, delivery address. That level of detail lets an agent tell it apart from bol_list_shipments. It stops short of naming the sibling explicitly, keeping it at 4 rather than 5.

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?

'by id' implies this is the single-record fetch versus the list variant, and the parameter description points back to bol_list_shipments as the id source. However, there is no explicit statement of when to prefer this over the list tool or what happens on an unknown id (error vs empty). Usage is implied, not spelled out.

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