firestarter_track_order

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false; the description adds meaningful context by specifying it only works after an order has been paid and shipped. It also discloses what kind of tracking detail will be returned. This is good behavioral context without contradictions.

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?

Three short, information-dense sentences. The core purpose is front-loaded, the output payload is listed succinctly, and the alternative routing to firestarter_status is in the final sentence. No wasted words.

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 single-parameter, low-complexity lookup tool, the description is complete. There is no output schema, so the description accurately summarizes the return contents. It also states the precondition and the alternative tool, leaving no obvious gap for an agent to call it correctly.

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 input schema already documents execution_id with a clear description and format hint (exec_...), and schema description coverage is 100%. The tool description does not add significant parameter-level semantics, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'Track a shipped order's delivery status.' It also names what will be returned, and the closing sentence distinguishes it from firestarter_status. An agent can correctly identify this as the delivery-tracking tool among dozens of siblings.

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?

Explicit trigger language is given: use when a buyer asks 'where's my order?' or 'when will it arrive?'. It also provides a clear exclusion condition: for unpaid/unshipped orders, use firestarter_status instead. This gives clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance.

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