Get Shipping Methods

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden, and 'Get available' does convey a non-mutating lookup. It does not mention account/site selection behavior, possible errors, or any additional constraints, but for a simple read-only tool this is not a serious omission.

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?

One functional sentence plus a single illustrative example; there is no filler, redundancy, or repeated schema information. The main purpose is front-loaded.

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 description is adequate for a straightforward getter, and the output schema exists to define the return shape. It lacks explicit alternative routing (get_shipment vs get_shipping_methods) and account/site profile hints, leaving some context to be inferred.

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 two required parameters are semantically covered by 'item' and 'destination zip code', and the example maps them to realistic values (MLA123, 11000). The optional account and site_id fields are documented in the nested schema, so the description does not need to repeat them, though it adds no extra selection guidance for those profiles.

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 states a specific action ('Get'), a concrete resource ('available shipping methods'), and a clear scope ('for an item to a destination zip code'). This distinguishes it from siblings like get_shipment or get_item without needing to inspect their schemas.

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 usage example signals the intended query pattern ('What shipping options are available...?'), so an agent can infer when to use it. However, it gives no explicit when-not-to-use guidance or contrast with siblings such as get_shipment for tracking an existing shipment.

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