print_shipping_labels

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It is transparent about the exact response shape not being guaranteed and instructs the agent to inspect a real response before making assumptions. It does not explicitly state whether the operation has side effects, but the disclosure about schema uncertainty is valuable and honest.

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?

Two sentences, both necessary. The first states the operation directly, and the second provides a concise, front-loaded warning about the response format. There is no filler or repetition.

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?

For a tool with one parameter, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers the input purpose, the output shape (success.labels[] with a label field), and the key caveat about encoding. It omits side-effect and prerequisite details, but is reasonably complete for a simple retrieval-like operation.

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 schema has 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It connects the single parameter to 'order items' and clarifies that labels are returned per item. However, it does not add detail about array size limits, ID format, or how invalid IDs are handled, though the parameter name is fairly self-explanatory.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and a clear resource ('printable shipping labels for order items'). It is not a tautology and precisely identifies what the tool does, distinguishing it from the order and packing-related sibling tools.

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?

There is no guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives like create_consignment, pack_orders_v2, or get_order_items. The description says what the tool returns but does not mention prerequisites, exclusions, or when another tool would be more appropriate.

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