sfc_create_order

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

Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral transparency. It reveals critical behavioral constraints, specifically the requirement of confirm=true and the non-retry policy upon timeout.

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 three sentences are highly efficient. The critical information (naming, requirement, workflow advice) is front-loaded and delivers maximum actionable intelligence with minimal word count.

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?

Despite the high parameter count (24), the description provides the necessary contextual glue for an agent: the 'why' and 'how' of the workflow (preview -> confirm -> handle failure), which compensates fully for the lack of detailed parameter documentation.

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?

While the schema provides the definitions, the description adds semantic meaning by identifying the 'confirm' flag as a crucial submission trigger. Given the very low schema description coverage (29%), these high-level operational constraints are highly valuable.

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 identifies the tool's function ('Create an SFC order'), includes the technical endpoint name ('addOrder'), and establishes a clear preference relative to the sibling tool sfc_preview_order.

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 explicit operational boundaries: it requires confirm=true for successful submission, advises using sfc_preview_order first, and gives a specific failure strategy (do not retry on timeout; search instead).

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