list_fba_shipments

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It only states that the tool returns 'FBA shipments and their status', but it does not disclose whether the tool is read-only, whether it has side effects, what statuses are available, or any data volume considerations (e.g., pagination). The description is insufficient for understanding behavior.

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 (one short sentence), but it is under-specified for a tool with three parameters and no schema descriptions. It is front-loaded but sacrifices completeness. 'Appropriately sized' would require more detail given the context.

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?

Despite the presence of an output schema, the description does not indicate what information each shipment includes (e.g., IDs, status values, dates). It also does not clarify the filtering behavior of the parameters. Given the complexity of FBA shipping and the number of sibling tools, the description is incomplete.

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 does not explain any of the three parameters ('status', 'marketplace', 'shipment_ids'). The parameter names offer some self-documentation, but no details on valid values, formats, or usage patterns are given. The description adds no value 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 'FBA shipments and their status' clearly indicates the tool lists FBA shipments and provides their status, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'get_fba_shipment_items' or 'get_fba_returns' that focus on different aspects. However, it lacks explicit verb+resource clarity (e.g., 'List' is implied but not stated), and the brevity leaves some ambiguity about exact scope.

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 siblings like 'get_fba_shipment_items' or 'get_fba_returns'. There is no mention of prerequisites, context, or exclusions. The description does not help an agent choose between similar tools.

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