sla_breaches

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuine value by defining what counts as a breach (prep-time overrun or passed delivery promise), but it says nothing about scope, filtering behavior, or how the 48-hour default is applied.

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 with no filler; every word carries the breach definition. Nothing is repeated from the schema or annotations.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described. However, the sole input parameter's meaning is left unexplained in both schema and description, which is a real gap for a threshold-driven query tool.

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 0% and the description never mentions 'sla_hours' or explains what the default of 48 measures or applies to (prep time vs. delivery promise). With a single undocumented threshold parameter that materially changes the result set, the description fails to compensate for the schema gap.

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 ('bulur' / finds) and a specific resource set (orders that exceed preparation time or have passed their delivery promise), which is meaningfully more precise than a generic 'list orders'. It is distinguishable from siblings like list_orders, though it does not explicitly name or contrast with any of them.

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?

There is no guidance on when to call this tool versus list_orders, stock_alerts, or daily_digest, and no stated prerequisites or exclusions. The agent must infer the trigger condition entirely from the one-line definition.

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