FulfillmentInbound_updateShipmentTrackingDetails

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. The "Catalog entry" and "not here" statements usefully disclose that this is not an executable local operation, and "Updates" signals mutation. It does not mention prerequisites, reversibility, or side effects of updating tracking details.

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 no filler. The environmental warning is front-loaded and the action verb is stated clearly.

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 annotations, no output schema, and an empty input schema, the description should provide enough context to invoke it correctly. It only names the action and the remote deployment; an agent cannot know which shipment identifier, tracking fields, or expected response are involved.

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, so there are no parameter semantics to add; per the 0-param baseline, this is adequate. The description mentions "tracking details" but arbitrary additional properties are allowed, so an agent still gets minimal field-level help.

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?

"Updates a shipment's tracking details" states a clear verb and resource, so the agent understands the core action. However, it does not differentiate from sibling update tools such as FulfillmentInbound_updateShipmentName or explain what "tracking details" specifically covers.

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?

"Runs in your Kuudo deployment, not here" is an explicit environmental exclusion, telling the agent this tool should not be invoked in the current context. It does not name alternatives or specify when to choose this over other shipment-update tools, so it stops short of a 5.

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