commerce_preflight

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

Despite no annotations, the description fully discloses the tool's behavior: it returns a deprecation notice and does not execute the commerce preflight pipeline. No hidden side effects or contradictions.

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 long, front-loaded with the deprecation notice, and every sentence adds value. No wasted words.

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 deprecated tool that simply returns a notice, the description covers why (moved to gateway), what it does instead (returns notice), and how to proceed (use alternatives). No gaps.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description provides no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema already offers, which is acceptable for a deprecated stub.

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 tool returns a machine-readable deprecation notice and no longer runs the pipeline locally. It specifies the resource (commerce preflight orchestration) and the action (returns notice), distinguishing it from the gateway endpoint mentioned as an alternative.

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?

Explicitly tells the agent not to use this tool ('moved to gateway') and provides clear alternatives: 'Compose the pure gate predicates from the SDK yourself, or call the gateway.' This gives definitive when-not-to-use guidance.

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