Create Shipping Label

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

The description adds value beyond annotations by revealing asynchronous behavior and recommending a follow-up tool (get_process_status). Annotations already indicate non-read-only, non-destructive, non-idempotent, and open-world hints. The description does not contradict annotations and provides additional context.

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 three sentences, front-loaded with the core action, and every sentence conveys necessary information without redundancy. It is clear and efficient.

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 2-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential flow: purpose, prerequisite, async behavior, and follow-up. Missing details like error handling or process status content, but overall adequate for an agent to invoke 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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so both parameters are well-described in the schema. The description only adds that shippingLabelOfferId comes from get_delivery_options, which is helpful but minimal. With high schema coverage, baseline is 3.

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 explicitly states the action ('create a shipping label'), the target resource ('shipping label for one or more order items'), and the prerequisite (shippingLabelOfferId from get_delivery_options). It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like get_shipping_label and get_process_status.

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 clear context: it requires a shippingLabelOfferId from get_delivery_options, and the label is created asynchronously, so use get_process_status to check completion. It does not explicitly state when not to use this tool, but the context is sufficient for an AI agent to decide.

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