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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden and does well: it explains the two payment paths, warns 'Never claim to have paid — confirm with get-order-status,' and notes the reduced address requirement for digital-only baskets. It could add more about side effects beyond converting the basket, but the key behavioral caveats are present.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose and every sentence adds useful context: payment methods, the never-claim-paid warning, and address requirements. It is slightly longer than strictly necessary but remains efficient and well organized.

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?

The description covers the essential outcomes (order creation, payment links), the two payment methods, the follow-up step via get-order-status, and digital-only address handling. There is no output schema, but the description gives enough return-value context for an agent to proceed.

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 the schema already documents each parameter. The description reinforces shipping_address behavior for digital-only baskets but adds little new meaning beyond the schema. This matches the baseline for high 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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Turn a basket into an order and get payment links.' It clearly distinguishes this checkout action from sibling basket-management tools like add-to-basket and view-basket, and the payment-link focus separates it from get-order-status.

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 gives clear context: use this when a basket is ready to become an order and payment links are needed. It also directs the agent to get-order-status for confirmation and clarifies address requirements for digital-only baskets. It does not explicitly state when not to use the tool, but the guidance is strong.

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