⚠️ Orders: click-and-collect (details)

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

The description identifies the tool as a write operation, matching the readOnlyHint=false annotation. It adds behavioral context by noting the prerequisite (available action) and the buyer-facing outcome (sends details). However, it does not describe error conditions or the exact state changes beyond what annotations imply. Given the annotations already provide safety hints, this is sufficient but not exhaustive.

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 four sentences long, each serving a clear purpose: stating the action, explaining what the seller sets, specifying when to call, and indicating the next step. It is front-loaded with the core purpose and avoids unnecessary words or repetition.

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 provides necessary context for using the tool: prerequisite, action details, and subsequent step. However, it does not describe the return value or what the tool outputs (e.g., success/error), which would be helpful given no output schema. Still, the combination with the schema and annotations makes it largely complete for correct usage.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage, the input schema already documents all 7 parameters. The description highlights three key parameters (address, bookingPeriod, details) but does not add new meaning beyond the schema. The baseline of 3 is appropriate since the description does not reduce clarity but also does not enhance parameter understanding.

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 tool prepares a click-and-collect order and sends details to the buyer. It defines the acronym CNC and specifies the seller sets the pickup address, booking period, and comment. It distinguishes from sibling tools by mentioning the prerequisite (available setCNCDetails action) and the subsequent confirmation step via orders_apply_transition.

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 call the tool: 'Call it when the order has an available setCNCDetails action.' It also provides a clear alternative for the next step: 'After handover, confirmation is done via orders_apply_transition (receive) with the buyer's code.' This gives concrete context and excludes other use cases.

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