Create Shipment

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

The description adds beyond annotations: it states the tool returns a process status and that shipment creation is asynchronous. It references get_process_status for completion. No contradictions with annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false).

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?

Two sentences that front-load the main action and immediately follow with key requirements and usage notes. No redundant information. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

Covers essential aspects: required parameters, optional transport, async behavior, verification step. Could explain FBR meaning, but not critical. Without an output schema, the description sufficiently sets expectations for return value and next steps.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds an example of transporter codes and reiterates key points like 'omit quantity to ship full ordered quantity'. It provides context about transport being required for FBR shipments, adding value beyond schema.

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 the action (Create), the resource (shipment), and the scope (for one or more order items). It distinguishes this tool from siblings like create_return, create_replenishment, etc.

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 clear guidance: must provide order item IDs, optionally transport details. Advises to verify order item IDs with get_order before using. Mentions asynchronous nature and checking process status. Could explicitly mention when not to use, but current guidance is strong.

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