send_order_details

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

No annotations are available, and the description only says the tool sends order details. It does not disclose side effects such as delivering a message to an end user, requiring approved templates, cost implications, or error/response behavior, so the agent has minimal behavioral context beyond the core action.

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 very short and front-loaded, but it is under-specified rather than appropriately concise. With 10 parameters and nested objects, more detail is necessary to be useful.

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 the high parameter count, nested objects, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is severely incomplete. It fails to explain return values, required vs optional parameters, or how it integrates with other send_* tools.

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?

The schema has 10 parameters with 0% description coverage, and the description mentions none of them. The agent must guess the meaning of required fields like template, namespace, language, and order, as well as optional fields such as paymentSettings and referenceId.

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 clearly states the tool sends order details, naming a specific action and resource, with a parenthetical 'India payments template' that adds context. However, it does not explicitly distinguish this from sibling send tools like send_template or send_message, so it is clear but not fully distinctive.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The parenthetical hints at an India-specific payments template, but there is no explicit mention of prerequisites, exclusions, or preferred scenarios, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name alone.

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