Delivery: push announcement tracking event [sandbox]

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

The description reveals non-idempotency (re-sending logs a duplicate), empty 200 response, and that it does not modify existing history. Annotations (readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=false) are consistent and the description adds valuable behavioral context.

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 two sentences, front-loading the core purpose and appending key details. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy.

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, usage, event progression, non-idempotency, return type, and sibling distinction. Without an output schema, it could mention that the response is an empty 200, which it does. Slight gap: no mention of potential errors or constraints on event order, but overall very complete.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds the typical event progression which aids understanding of the 'event' enum, but does not significantly elaborate on parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides.

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 that the tool appends one tracking event for an announcement in a sandbox environment. It specifies the resource (announcement), the action (track event), and distinguishes itself from the parcel-level sibling 'delivery_tracking'.

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 explicitly states when to use this tool ('announcement-level analogue of delivery_tracking'), provides a typical event progression (ACCEPTANCE_DONE → RECEIVED → DELIVERED or CANCELLED), and notes non-idempotency and partner-only access.

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