Delivery: push tracking event [sandbox]

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

The description goes beyond annotations by explaining that it does not modify existing history, is not idempotent (duplicate logging), returns empty 200 on success, and provides error semantics. It also mentions retry policy and audience. No contradictions 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 at about 4-5 sentences and front-loads the purpose. Every sentence adds value, though it could be slightly more structured with bullet points.

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 10 parameters, no output schema, and annotations, the description covers usage, error handling, audience, and retry policy. It lacks explanation of the response beyond empty 200, but that is acceptable for a mutation tool.

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 the description does not need to repeat parameter details. It adds context by mentioning the event type and status transition as an example, but does not significantly augment the schema descriptions.

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 'appends', the resource 'parcel tracking event', and scopes it to a single status transition. It distinguishes from siblings by specifying that this tool only appends status events, while others set cost/parameters or reschedule parcels.

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 says when to use ('report movement as it happens'), cautions about non-idempotency and duplicate logging, explains error responses (4xx rejection, 5xx retry), and limits usage to delivery-service PARTNERS. It also names sibling tools and their purposes.

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