book_batch_and_label

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses that the tool saves the merged PDF to a specific directory ('~/Downloads/parcel-toolkit/') and that this can be overridden via an environment variable. It implies booking occurs. However, it does not mention API calls, authorization needs, or error handling, slightly reducing transparency.

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 three sentences: first states purpose and outcome, second gives usage context, third adds shared properties and output path. It is front-loaded, concise, and every sentence adds value without fluff.

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 complexity (7 parameters, nested objects, no output schema), the description explains the output as a merged PDF and its save location. However, it does not specify the return value of the tool (e.g., success message or file path) or cover booking confirmations, leaving some gaps for an agent.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds that all shipments share the same service, collection date, and sender, which is already captured in schema descriptions. The batch context is provided but does not significantly enhance parameter understanding beyond the schema.

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 action ('Book multiple APC shipments at once') and its outcome ('return a single merged PDF containing every label, ready to print'). It also distinguishes from sibling tools like 'book_shipment' by specifying batch behavior and usage when pasting a list of addresses. The verb 'book' and resource 'APC shipments' are specific.

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 a clear usage hint: 'Use this when the user pastes a list of orders/addresses.' It also notes that all shipments share the same service, collection date, and sender, indicating constraints. However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools or state when not to use it, missing some guidance.

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