place_order

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden and effectively discloses critical behavioral traits: it's a real-world transaction ('PLACES A REAL ORDER with real payment!'), requires payment info, and implies irreversible action. It could improve by mentioning response format or confirmation details.

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 with zero waste: the first conveys the core action and warning, the second states the prerequisite. It's front-loaded with the critical warning and appropriately sized for its purpose.

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 high-stakes mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is mostly complete—it warns of real consequences and lists requirements. It could be enhanced by specifying what happens after submission (e.g., order confirmation, errors) or return values.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all four parameters (card_number, card_expiry, card_cvv, card_zip). The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond implying these are required for payment, meeting the baseline of 3 when 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?

The description clearly states the specific action ('PLACES A REAL ORDER with real payment') and the target resource ('Submit the current order to Domino's'), distinguishing it from siblings like 'add_item_to_order' or 'view_order' which handle order modification or viewing rather than final submission with payment.

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 explicitly states when to use this tool ('Submit the current order to Domino's') and includes prerequisites ('Requires payment information'), with clear alternatives implied by sibling tools like 'view_order' for checking status or 'add_item_to_order' for modifications before submission.

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