get_delivery_summary

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. While 'Get' implies a read operation, it doesn't specify whether this requires authentication, has rate limits, returns real-time or cached data, or handles errors. The description mentions what it returns but lacks operational context needed for safe invocation.

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 appropriately concise with three brief sentences that are front-loaded: purpose first, then parameter explanation, then return value. There's no wasted text, though the structure could be slightly improved by integrating the parameter and return sections more seamlessly.

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?

Given the tool's moderate complexity (single parameter read operation) and lack of annotations/output schema, the description is minimally adequate. It covers purpose, parameter meaning, and return content, but misses behavioral aspects like authentication needs or error handling that would be important for completeness in this context.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage and only one parameter, the description effectively compensates by clearly explaining that 'order_id' refers to 'The ID of the package order'. This adds meaningful context beyond the schema's basic type information, making the parameter's purpose clear despite 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 clearly states the tool's purpose with a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('summary of delivery statistics'), making it immediately understandable. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'get_order_details' or 'get_orders_by_date_range', which might also provide related delivery information.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With siblings like 'get_order_details' and 'get_orders_by_date_range' available, there's no indication whether this tool is for aggregated statistics versus detailed information, or what specific context warrants its use.

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