shipday_set_order_ready_to_pickupWRITE: set or clear an order's ready-to-pickup flag (tells the driver the order is ready at the pickup location). Shipday: PUT /orders/{orderId}/meta.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| order_id | Yes | Shipday's internal numeric order id (the `orderId` field, not the order number). | |
| ready_to_pickup | No | true = ready (default), false = not ready. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already carry readOnlyHint=false and idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is covered; the description reinforces this with a front-loaded 'WRITE:' tag and clarifies that the flag can be cleared (set to false), not just set. It does not mention auth needs or what gets returned, but the added flag semantics are meaningful.
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 short, front-loaded with 'WRITE:', and every clause (flag semantics, endpoint, default) earns its place. 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?
Given a two-parameter tool with full schema coverage and safety annotations, the description is complete enough for correct invocation. The only minor gap is no hint about response behavior, but for a simple flag-setter this is negligible.
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 both parameters (order_id and ready_to_pickup) are already fully documented, including the default of true. The description's 'set or clear' wording is the only extra, so the 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?
The description states a specific verb (set or clear) and a specific resource (an order's ready-to-pickup flag), plus the underlying Shipday endpoint. The purpose is narrow and unambiguous, and an agent can separate it from its siblings, none of which touch this flag.
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?
The description clarifies the flag's meaning for the driver, which gives useful context on why to call it, but there is no explicit guidance about when-not to call it, prerequisites, or how this interacts with the driver assignment lifecycle. Usage is implied rather than stated.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.