Доставка: результат изменения посылки

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

Annotations provide minimal behavioral context (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, openWorldHint=true). The description adds no additional behavioral traits: it does not state if it modifies data, requires authorization, or has side effects. For a write operation, more transparency is expected.

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?

Single sentence of 12 words is concise and front-loaded with the core action. Could include a bit more detail without being verbose, but as is it avoids waste.

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?

No output schema, so description should explain return value; it does not. Parameters are vaguely described. For a tool in a multi-step delivery process, more context about when and how to use this result action is needed.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the sparse schema descriptions (e.g., 'status' as 'Result status', 'reason' as 'Reason'). No enumeration or format hints. External swagger reference for 'options' is opaque.

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 'Sending the result of executing a request to change a parcel' which is a specific verb ('sending') and resource ('result of change parcel request'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tool 'delivery_change_parcels' (the request itself). However, could be more explicit about reporting an outcome.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. No mention of prerequisites, dependencies, or exclusion criteria. The agent has no help in deciding to call this tool after a change request.

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