ExternalFulfillmentShipments_updatePackage

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It usefully reveals that this is a 'Catalog entry' and that execution happens in the Kuudo deployment, not in the current environment. However, it does not disclose side effects, permissions, reversibility, or response behavior for a mutation-like update operation.

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 two short sentences and front-loads the important 'not here' deployment constraint before the action statement. Minor redundancy exists between 'Catalog entry' and 'Runs in your Kuudo deployment, not here,' but the overall size is appropriate and free of significant filler.

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 tool with no output schema, no annotations, and an empty input schema, the description provides enough context to recognize its purpose and non-local execution. It is not complete enough to actually invoke correctly, since there is no information about required identifiers or expected payload structure, but the 'not here' statement may intentionally signal that invocation is not the intended use.

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 documented properties and allows additionalProperties: true, so the description needs to compensate. It adds that the update concerns packages for a 'specified shipment,' but it does not explain what identifiers or fields should be supplied. With zero schema parameters the baseline is 4, but the open additionalProperties and implied shipment/package identifiers reduce the value of that baseline.

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 states a specific action ('Updates') and a clear resource ('details about the packages that will be used to fulfill the specified shipment'). This is distinguishable from sibling ExternalFulfillmentShipments_updatePackageStatus, which focuses on status rather than package details, though the description does not name that sibling explicitly.

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 gives a clear contextual constraint: it 'Runs in your Kuudo deployment, not here,' which tells the agent this is not an Amazon-side invocation. However, it does not explicitly explain when to choose this over related siblings like createPackages or updatePackageStatus, so usage guidance is only implied rather than explicit.

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