Discogs: update marketplace order

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of disclosing side effects. It does disclose the key behavioral trait that changing status notifies the buyer, which is valuable. However, it doesn't mention other potential behaviors, such as validation of status transitions, reversibility, or immediate effects.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, and the second sentence provides a crucial safety note. Every word adds value without redundancy.

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?

The description is adequate for a straightforward mutation tool: it names the resource, updatable fields, and a key side effect. However, given no output schema and no annotations, it lacks details on status transition constraints, expected response, or error handling, which could leave an agent uncertain about edge cases.

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 description coverage is only 25% (only 'shipping' has a description). The description adds meaning for 'status' and 'additional_instructions' by naming them, but 'order_id' remains implied. It partially compensates for the low schema coverage by clarifying the purpose of three of the four parameters.

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 ('Update') and the resource ('marketplace order'), and lists the specific fields being updated: status, shipping price, additional instructions. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like discogs_get_order or discogs_update_listing.

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 provides clear context for use by specifying what can be updated and includes a critical guideline: confirming with the user before changing status because that notifies the buyer. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives, but the scope is well-defined.

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