firestarter_ship_order

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

Annotations already mark this as a non-read-only, non-destructive action. The description adds useful side effects beyond the annotations: the buyer is notified automatically, tracking becomes available to the buyer, and carrier defaults to USPS. It does not discuss reversibility, but the annotation plus side-effect context is adequate.

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 and front-loaded: core action, required fields, and default behavior appear immediately. The subsequent sentences each add distinct value—flow context, timing, side effects, and an id warning—without repetition or 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 simple three-parameter mutation with no output schema, the description covers the complete invocation decision: which flow step this is, when to call it, required parameters, carrier default, buyer-side side effects, and exactly where order_id comes from. Nothing essential to invoking it correctly is missing.

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 all parameters. The description adds real semantic value by emphasizing that only order_id and tracking_number are required, that carrier is optional and defaults to USPS, and that order_id must be the seller-facing id rather than the exec_... execution id.

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 names the exact action ('Mark an order shipped'), the object (order), and required data (carrier and tracking number). It also positions the tool as the terminal step of a named fulfillment sequence, making it distinguishable from siblings like firestarter_confirm_order and firestarter_track_order.

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 explicitly states when to call it: 'Call once the seller has actually handed the package to the carrier and has a tracking number.' It also places it after firestarter_confirm_order and notes that no separate buyer message is needed, steering the agent away from firestarter_message.

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