order_catalog_item

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

Annotations already flag this as a non-read-only, non-idempotent operation. The description adds the WRITE_ENABLED=true prerequisite, which is useful, but it does not disclose side effects like creating a request, triggering approvals, or what response to expect. With annotations covering the safety profile, a 3 is appropriate.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence that states the action and a key requirement. Every word earns its place; there is no wasted text or 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?

For a mutative, open-world action with no output schema, the description lacks context about the result (e.g., what is returned, whether a request is created). The 100% param coverage helps, but the tool's external effects and response format are left unspecified.

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 100%, so the parameters (sys_id, quantity, variables) are already documented. The description adds no extra parameter meaning beyond what the schema provides, so baseline 3 is correct.

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 uses a specific verb+resource combination ('Order a service catalog item') that clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_catalog_item, get_catalog_item, and update_catalog_item. The action is well-defined and unambiguous.

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 implies usage (when you want to order a catalog item) but does not explicitly state when to prefer this over alternatives like create_catalog_item or search_catalog. It only provides a prerequisite (WRITE_ENABLED=true), not usage context or exclusion criteria.

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