Discogs: add order message

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of disclosing mutating behavior. It explicitly mentions that the status can be changed, which is a key side effect. However, it omits details such as required permissions, response format, or any potential consequences beyond the status change.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler words. It efficiently conveys the primary action and the optional status change.

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 three parameters and no output schema or annotations, the description covers the core operation but leaves out any mention of return behavior, permissions, or preconditions. It is adequate but not thoroughly complete for autonomous agent decision-making.

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 descriptions are absent, but the description provides meaning for 'message' (the content to post) and 'status' (the optional new status), and 'order_id' is implied via 'order's'. It does not add constraints or formats, but it does clarify the relationship between message and status, providing moderate value over the raw schema.

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 the action: 'Post a message to a marketplace order's message thread' and also identifies the optional side effect of 'changing its status'. It distinguishes itself from siblings like discogs_list_order_messages and discogs_update_order by specifying the exact resource and type of operation.

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?

Usage context is implied by the description: use when you need to post a message to an order's thread. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it, nor does it compare with alternatives like discogs_update_order, which might also change status.

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