wb_supplies_reshipment

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry all behavioral weight, but it only names a category of orders. It does not disclose whether the call is read-only, what it returns, whether it mutates state, or any operational constraints.

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 text is short and free of filler, and the parenthetical translation may aid clarity. However, it is a noun phrase rather than a structured instruction, so compactness comes at the cost of key information such as the operation being performed.

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?

For a zero-parameter tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description should at least explain what a call returns and whether it affects state. 'Orders that need reshipment' does not give enough context for an agent to confidently invoke the tool or interpret its response.

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 input schema has zero parameters and 100% schema description coverage, so the schema fully accounts for the call signature. The description adds no parameter details, but none are needed; baseline 4 applies.

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 identifies a domain—orders needing reshipment—which distinguishes it from unrelated wb_* tools, but it lacks a verb: it does not say whether the tool returns, updates, or creates these reshipment orders. With siblings like wb_orders_list, wb_dbs_orders, and wb_supply_detail, the phrasing remains ambiguous.

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?

There is no statement of when to use this tool or when to prefer an alternative. The sibling list includes many order and supply tools, but the description gives no conditions or exclusions to guide selection.

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