wb_cc_orders_client

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden of disclosing whether this operation is read-only or mutating. The vague 'statuses confirm/prepare' could imply a write action, but the description does not state side effects, required permissions, response behavior, or what happens when confirming/preparing statuses. This is a significant transparency 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 extremely short, but this is under-specification rather than useful conciseness. It front-loads no actionable verb or scope, and the fragmentary syntax makes the intended meaning ambiguous rather than efficiently clear.

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?

Even though the input schema is simple, the description is not complete enough to support correct invocation. It fails to state the operation type, the meaning of order_ids, the returned data, or how this tool differs from a large set of closely related order/client/status tools.

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 only parameter, order_ids, has 0% schema description coverage, and the tool description does not mention it at all. The agent is left to infer that the array contains order identifiers, with no guidance on ID format, scope, cardinality, or how the IDs relate to the featured buyer data and statuses.

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 is a noun phrase ('Buyer data, statuses confirm/prepare') without a clear action verb, so it is unclear whether the tool retrieves buyer data, updates order statuses, or both. The pickup-buyer note adds some context, but it does not distinguish this tool from similar siblings like wb_orders_client_info, wb_dbs_orders_client, or wb_cc_orders_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?

No explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is provided. The phrase 'statuses confirm/prepare' hints at a possible status-related use case, but the description never explains when an agent should invoke this tool instead of the many adjacent order/client/status tools in the sibling list.

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