Delivery: prohibit acceptance [sandbox]

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true. The description adds that the parcel will not be taken into processing, returns success status, and that non-partners receive 403/404. It also reveals implementation side (delivery-service). No contradictions. Could mention if reversible, but overall transparent.

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, front-loaded with the key action and scope. Efficiently conveys purpose, usage, and constraints without redundancy. Every sentence adds value.

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 covers purpose, pairing, target users, and error cases. With 3 params fully schema-documented and no output schema, it is sufficient for an agent to decide. Lacks exact return format but acceptable.

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%. The description does not add meaningful parameter details beyond what the schema already provides for orderId, dryRun, and idempotencyKey. Baseline of 3 is appropriate as the description does not detract but adds no extra semantics.

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 verb 'prohibits acceptance', identifies the resource 'delivery service', and distinguishes it from siblings by naming the paired tool 'delivery_sandbox_cancel_parcel' and specifying the target user group (delivery-service PARTNERS).

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 tells when to use: 'A step in the parcel-cancellation flow (pair with delivery_sandbox_cancel_parcel)' and who can use: 'for delivery-service PARTNERS only (a regular seller account gets 403/404)'. This provides clear context, though no explicit alternative for non-partners is given.

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