fulfillment_alerts

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It explains that alerts are generated from cancellations, failures, or processing delays. However, it does not specify return format, side effects, authentication needs, or rate limits, leaving some behavioral gaps.

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?

Three concise sentences with no wasted words. Front-loaded with the main purpose, followed by brief elaboration. Perfectly sized for a simple alert-checking tool.

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 0 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the domain well: it defines alerts and their triggers. It could explicitly mention output structure (e.g., list of alerts with fields), but for a tool of this simplicity, it is mostly complete.

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 tool has 0 parameters, so schema coverage is 100%. Baseline is 4. The description adds value by explaining what the tool returns, which is appropriate given no parameters.

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 verb 'check' and resource 'fulfillment order alerts', and specifies three alert types (stalled, failed, cancelled). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like fulfillment_order by focusing on active alerts from a background monitor.

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 implies usage for checking active alerts, but does not explicitly state when not to use it or suggest alternative tools like fulfillment_order_status for detailed order info. Context is clear but lacks explicit exclusions.

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