alopeyk_finish_order

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

Without annotations, the description warns 'WARNING: real delivery', implies the action is terminal, and details the HTTP mapping and error conditions. This sufficiently discloses the tool's impact.

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 moderately long but well-structured: purpose, warning, prerequisites, HTTP mapping, and arg list. Each sentence adds value, though the Persian repetition slightly lengthens it.

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?

Given no annotations and 4 parameters, the description covers purpose, prerequisites, HTTP details, and parameter semantics. It is complete enough for an ordering tool, though output schema is not described (but exists).

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 0%, but the description explains each parameter: order_id is numeric and required, comment is optional free-text, rate is optional 1-5, instance defaults when omitted. This adds significant meaning beyond the schema.

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 tool 'finishes/closes an order, optionally rating it' and provides the Persian purpose. It explicitly maps to a POST endpoint, distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'alopeyk_cancel_order'.

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 description specifies prerequisites: requires access_token, enable_ordering=true, and read_only=false, and warns that otherwise an error is returned. It does not explicitly contrast with siblings, but the purpose alone makes it clear when to use this tool.

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