Handle Return

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

Beyond annotations (idempotentHint=true, readOnlyHint=false), the description reveals async behavior: 'returns a process status — the return is handled asynchronously.' No contradictions with annotations.

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 concise sentences: purpose, key inputs, and usage guideline. No wasted words; easy to parse.

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 no output schema, the description mentions returning a process status and async handling. Could mention polling via get_process_status, but the current info is sufficient for basic use with good annotations.

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?

Input schema covers all three parameters with descriptions (100% coverage). The description adds value by listing the valid handling results and emphasizing the RMA ID source, but largely repeats schema info.

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 tool's purpose: 'Handle/process a return item by its RMA ID.' It specifies the key actions (setting handling result and quantity) and distinguishes this from other return-related tools like get_return.

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 instructs to 'Always review the return details with get_return before handling,' providing clear when-to guidance. It lists valid handling results but does not explicitly state when not to use the tool or compare to alternatives.

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