sfc_get_rates

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does mention that setting shipTypeCodes switches to HTTPS getRatesByShip and otherwise uses SOAP/HTTPS getRates for all methods, but it omits whether the operation is read-only, what permissions are needed, and what side effects or response characteristics to expect.

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 and front-loads the core purpose before the conditional routing detail. It avoids repetition, though the second sentence uses internal API jargon that could be clearer for an agent.

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 tool has 12 parameters, 5 required fields, no annotations, and no output schema. Given that complexity, the description is incomplete: it does not explain return values, units, defaults, required-field significance, or how quoted rates relate to sibling order tools.

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 33% across 12 parameters, so the description must compensate. It only explains the shipTypeCodes branching behavior and does not clarify the semantics of required inputs like country, weightKg, lengthCm, widthCm, or heightCm, nor optional inputs like city, zipCode, or divisionId.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Quote rates.' That is clear enough for an agent to know it retrieves shipping rate quotes. However, it does not distinguish this tool from siblings such as sfc_get_fee or sfc_preview_order, so it falls short of a 5.

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 gives no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like sfc_get_fee or sfc_preview_order. The only conditional mentioned is an internal routing detail based on shipTypeCodes, not a usage recommendation or exclusion.

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