Enable or disable scheduled orders

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

The description adds useful behavior beyond the annotations: it preserves tax settings unless overridden and states the auth prerequisite. Annotations already cover read-only/destructive/idempotency, so the extra context is meaningful rather than redundant.

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 tight sentences, each carrying distinct information: what the tool does, a side-effect safeguard, and a prerequisite. No repetition or padding.

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?

The dry-run/apply flow and confirmation token are covered by the rich schema, so the description does not need to repeat them. It provides the missing operational context (auth, tax preservation) and is complete enough for an agent to use the tool safely.

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 57% schema coverage, the schema already documents mode, taxRate, planDigest, and confirmationToken. The description adds value by tying the tax-related parameters to preservation behavior, but enabled and locationId still get no semantic help beyond their names/types.

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 names a specific action and resource: toggling order-ahead/scheduled orders when the restaurant is closed. It is clear, though it does not explicitly distinguish it from similar sibling tools such as set_takeout_enabled.

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?

It gives a clear context for use ('when the restaurant is closed') and an important prerequisite (craveup login). It does not name alternative tools or state when not to use it, stopping short of explicit routing.

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