bos_order_update_status

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It fails to disclose behavioral traits such as idempotency, authentication requirements, side effects (e.g., notifications), or what happens if the order already has the specified status.

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 extremely concise at three words, which earns points for lack of verbosity. However, it sacrifices completeness and structure; a bit more context would be beneficial.

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 no output schema, no annotations, and 0% schema coverage, the description is severely incomplete. It does not mention return values, error cases, or any constraints beyond the schema.

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?

The description adds no meaning beyond the input schema. With 0% schema description coverage, it does not compensate by explaining the enum values or providing context for order_id (e.g., format, source).

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 'Update order status' clearly states the verb (update) and the resource (order status), distinguishing it from sibling tools like bos_order_cancel, bos_order_refund, and bos_order_create.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. For example, it is unclear whether this tool should be used to cancel an order (by setting status to 'cancelled') or if bos_order_cancel is preferred.

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