ShippingLegacy_retrieveShippingLabel

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden but only adds an unclear deployment caveat ('Runs in your Kuudo deployment, not here') and the word 'Retrieve' to imply a read operation. It does not disclose output format, error behavior, idempotence, authentication, or rate-limit characteristics.

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 short and mostly scannable, but the opening 'Catalog entry.' is filler and the deployment caveat is vague. The substantive purpose appears only in the final sentence rather than being front-loaded.

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?

Given no annotations, no output schema, an open input schema, and many nearby shipping label/document tools, the description is too thin. It names the identifiers but leaves the agent to guess exact parameters, the runtime return value, and how this tool differs from sibling label/document retrieval operations.

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 is empty with additionalProperties true, so the description's mention of 'the shipment id and tracking id' is essential and adds real meaning beyond the schema. It stops short of specifying exact key names, formats, or which identifier is required, but for an open schema this is a useful 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 clearly states a specific verb and resource: 'Retrieve shipping label' using shipment id and tracking id. It does not, however, contrast with sibling label/document retrieval tools such as Shipping_getShipmentDocuments or ExternalFulfillmentShipments_generateShipLabels.

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 use case is implied: call this when a shipping label must be retrieved and you have shipment/tracking identifiers. There is no explicit when-not-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no reference to alternative Shipping* tools.

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