create_order_confirmation

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

Annotations already indicate a safe write operation (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false). The description adds no extra behavioral details, such as auto-numbering, side effects, or required preconditions, which would be valuable given the tool's complexity.

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 extremely concise at four words, which is efficient but under-specified for a tool with 19 parameters. It lacks structure and misses opportunities to front-load key details.

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 tool's complexity (19 parameters, no output schema) and rich sibling context, the description is inadequate. It does not explain the returned object, required permissions, or how the order confirmation relates to other document types.

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 every parameter has a description. The tool description adds nothing beyond the schema, resulting in the baseline score of 3.

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 'Creates new order confirmation' clearly states the verb and resource, making the tool's purpose obvious. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like create_invoice or create_offer, which also create document objects.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With many sibling create_* tools and change_order_confirmation_status, explicit usage context is essential but missing.

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