Update location store hours

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

The annotations already establish a mutating but non-destructive and idempotent operation, so the description only needs to add behavioral context. It contributes the authentication requirement via 'Requires craveup login.' It does not contradict any annotation, and 'Set when a location accepts orders' consistently implies a write operation.

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 two short sentences with the core action front-loaded and no filler. Every sentence earns its place: one states what the tool does and the other gives preset and authentication 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?

The input schema is unusually detailed and an output schema exists, so the description can focus on high-level context. It supplies the login requirement and the 7-day custom schedule, but for a 7-parameter workflow it could also mention the dry-run/apply model at the tool level; nevertheless, the schema covers that gap.

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 some parameter-level meaning by explaining that always_open is for dev/demo and that a custom preset requires a 7-day schedule. The input schema already provides substantial descriptions for mode, scope, planDigest, and confirmationToken, so the description does not need to repeat those.

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 opens with the active verb 'Set' and defines the resource as 'when a location accepts orders,' which clearly identifies the operation as updating recurring store hours. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tools like open_location_for_orders or set_scheduled_orders_enabled, but the mention of presets and a weekly schedule conveys the recurring-hours semantics.

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 conditional usage guidance: 'Use preset always_open for dev/demo, or pass a custom 7-day schedule,' and it notes the cravingup login prerequisite. However, it does not say when to prefer this tool over the many sibling location and schedule tools, nor does it offer exclusions or alternatives.

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