set_delivery_address

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 discloses that resolution happens via Lavka's own geo search, which is useful, but says nothing about side effects (does this replace the active delivery address, affect the cart, or persist a new address?), failure behavior for unresolvable text, or permissions.

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?

Two short sentences with the capability front-loaded and a concrete example that earns its place. Slight redundancy between 'ANY address' and 'works for a new city', but no meaningful waste.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and the geo-resolution behavior is covered. However, for a mutation with zero annotations and 0% parameter coverage, the description omits what state changes and how the remaining two parameters behave, leaving real gaps.

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 description coverage is 0% for 4 parameters. The example only illustrates query and flat; comment and entrance are left entirely undocumented in both schema and description, and no format expectations (e.g. what query must contain) are given beyond the sample string.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Set delivery to ANY address by free text') and adds a distinguishing scope note ('works for a new city') that separates it from saved-address siblings like use_address. It stops short of naming any sibling explicitly, so it is clear but not fully differentiated.

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 'works for a new city' / 'ANY address' phrasing implies the intended case (arbitrary, unsaved addresses) versus siblings such as use_address or list_addresses, but no alternative is named and no when-not guidance is given. Usage is inferable rather than stated.

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