Get Unmanifested Consignment for Edit

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

Description adds that the consignment must be in an unmanifested state and the output format is for editing, which is useful. Annotations already declare readOnlyHint true, so the safety profile is clear. No contradictions, and description provides moderate additional context beyond annotations.

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?

Description is extremely concise: two sentences with no unnecessary words. First sentence states purpose, second lists the argument. Front-loaded and efficient.

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 simple get operation with one parameter and full annotation coverage (readOnly, idempotent, etc.), the description is complete. It explains the specific purpose (for edit) and the required state (unmanifested). No output schema, but the description adequately signals what to expect.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents the 'id' parameter with the constraint 'must be unmanifested'. Description repeats this constraint and adds no new semantic detail. Baseline 3 applies as schema does the heavy lifting.

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?

Description clearly specifies 'Get an unmanifested consignment' with the purpose 'required to perform an update via the editUnmanifestedConsignment endpoint'. It distinguishes this tool from other consignment getters (e.g., get_consignment, get_unmanifested_consignments) by focusing on edit-ready format.

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?

Description implies usage context (for editing unmanifested consignments) but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_consignment or get_unmanifested_consignments. No sibling differentiation or exclusions provided.

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