mark_order_placed

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It describes the core behavior (marking cart as placed and moving to history) but lacks details on permissions needed, whether this is irreversible, error conditions, or rate limits. For a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a moderate gap.

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 appropriately sized and front-loaded: the first sentence states the purpose, the second provides usage guidelines, and the Args/Returns sections are structured efficiently. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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 (a mutation with one parameter) and lack of annotations/output schema, the description is mostly complete. It covers purpose, usage, parameters, and return value, but could improve by adding more behavioral context like error handling or confirmation details.

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 description adds meaning beyond the input schema, which has 0% description coverage. It explains the single parameter ('order_notes: Optional notes about the order'), clarifying its purpose and optional nature. Since there's only one parameter and the description covers it adequately, this compensates well for the schema gap.

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 specific action ('Mark the current cart as an order that has been placed'), identifies the resource ('current cart'), and specifies the outcome ('move it to order history'). It distinguishes this tool from siblings like 'view_current_cart' and 'view_order_history' by indicating it transitions the cart to order 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 explicitly states when to use this tool ('Use this after you've completed checkout on the Kroger website/app'), providing clear contextual guidance. It differentiates from alternatives by implying this is a post-checkout action, not for viewing or modifying carts.

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