firestarter_set_shipping_policy

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

Annotations already indicate a write operation (readOnlyHint=false) and non-destructive (destructiveHint=false). The description adds meaningful context: sanctioned/embargoed destinations remain blocked, the policy applies to one listing (scope), and mode 'domestic' is the default. This exceeds the structured fields without contradicting them.

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 compact, front-loaded with purpose and use context, and every sentence adds information. It covers modes, examples, a safety note (sanctions), and scope in a few lines with 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?

For a tool with 4 parameters, 3 modes, and no output schema, the description is thorough: it explains each mode, parameter constraints, default behavior, exclusions, and a critical edge case (sanctioned destinations). An agent has enough to call it correctly without additional lookup.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds value by stating that 'domestic' is the default, clarifying that 'list' auto-includes the ship-from country, and giving concrete examples for countries and exclude. This enriches beyond the schema's own descriptions without redundancy.

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 what the tool does: 'Set where a seller is willing to ship a listing.' It uses a specific verb (set) and resource (shipping policy), and mentions concrete use cases like a checkout failure. It is distinct from sibling shipping tools (options, estimate) because it focuses on policy mutation.

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?

Provides explicit when-to-use scenarios: when a buyer requests a destination not covered, and for general changes to shipping reach. It explains each mode with examples. It does not explicitly say when NOT to use it or name alternative tools, but the context is strong enough for an agent to select it appropriately.

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