order_service

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses response types (checkout_url vs order_id), billing behavior (no upfront charge for request-only), required email, and a hard restriction ('NEVER returns agent/seller contact'). Minor gaps: no mention of error cases or side effects like order status tracking.

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 sentences, front-loaded with purpose, then behavior, then explicit alternative. Every sentence adds value and there is zero fluff or repetition of schema field names.

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?

Covers the two product flows, payment mechanism, required fields, and the distinction from request_service. Slightly incomplete regarding what happens on failed payment or invalid product_type, but for a moderate-complexity tool with no output schema, it gives the agent enough to invoke correctly.

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 coverage is 100%, so the bar is lower, but the description adds relational meaning: product_type + variant come from list_services, and the message field is specifically for request-only products. It clarifies that buyer_email is a hard requirement and explains how parameters map to the two different order flows.

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 uses a specific verb+resource: 'Place an order for any platform service' with explicit product_type + variant. It clearly distinguishes from sibling request_service by contrasting 'plain buyer enquiry' vs actual order, and separates instant vs request-only products.

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?

Provides explicit when-to-use: ordering a service, and when-not-to: 'For a plain buyer enquiry to a listing's agent, prefer request_service.' Also explains the two product categories and their different flows, giving the agent clear decision criteria.

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