Delivery: actual address [sandbox]

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

Annotations already indicate it is a write operation (readOnlyHint=false), not destructive, and not idempotent. The description adds that it returns an empty 200 on success and mentions it is a sandbox tool, but does not elaborate on authorization, rate limits, or failure behavior. No contradiction with annotations.

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 concise (4 sentences), front-loads key purpose, and includes essential distinctions and constraints. It could be slightly more structured, but it efficiently conveys necessary information without 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?

Given the tool's complexity (4 parameters, nested objects, 100% schema coverage, no output schema), the description provides sufficient context: sandbox environment, partner-only usage, return value, and relationship to sibling. It covers the main aspects for correct invocation.

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 minimal extra meaning for parameters; it broadly explains the address parameter as 'actual pickup point' but the schema already provides detailed descriptions, including nested fields and constraints.

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 ('sends'), the resource ('actual pickup point'), and the scope ('for parcel acceptance/return'). It distinguishes from the sibling tool delivery_set_order_properties by specifying that this tool only sets the address.

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 provides explicit context: it is needed for agent and customer returns, and it is for delivery-service PARTNERS only. It differentiates from the sibling tool, but does not explicitly state when not to use it aside from the partner restriction.

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