place_merchant_order

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

The description adds behavioral context beyond annotations: it creates a database record, triggers payment collection, and sends an SMS. This is useful information that annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false) do not provide. It does not disclose failure behavior or idempotency, but overall adds value.

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 two sentences long, front-loaded with the core purpose, and contains no fluff or redundant information. It efficiently communicates the tool's function.

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 (8 parameters, 6 required, no schema descriptions), the description is incomplete. It lacks parameter explanations, usage context, and does not mention return values despite having an output schema. Sibling differentiation 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 description coverage is 0%, yet the description does not explain individual parameters like 'payment_phone', 'payment_network', or 'amount_ghc'. While it mentions a few fields descriptively, it fails to compensate for the lack of schema descriptions.

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 specifies the action (place), the resource (food order with merchant), and lists three sub-actions (MongoDB record, MoMo payment, SMS dispatch). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'create_verified_vendors_order' and '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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, conditions, or contexts where this tool is preferred over siblings like 'create_verified_vendors_order' or 'search_food_menus'.

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