Orders: create labels (up to 1000)

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

Discloses that it creates an async task, returns a taskID, has a rate limit of 1 request per minute, and is non-idempotent (idempotencyKey optional). Annotations already indicate non-read-only, non-idempotent, non-destructive; 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?

Four tightly packed sentences, front-loaded with main purpose, no redundant or unnecessary information. Each 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?

Covers purpose, constraints, async nature, rate limit, follow-up steps, and sibling comparison. No output schema exists, but description adequately explains return value (taskID) and next steps. Annotations complement well.

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% with detailed parameter descriptions. The description adds some context (e.g., 'up to 1000 orders', 'pickup-point only') but does not provide additional parameter-level semantics beyond what the schema already offers. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 creates a task to generate PDF labels for large batches of orders (up to 1000), distinguishes from sibling tool orders_generate_labels by specifying higher limit and rate limit, and notes it is only for pickup-point orders.

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?

Explicitly states when to use (for large batches of pickup-point orders), contrasts with sibling tool (higher limit but strict rate limiting), and advises waiting for task completion and downloading via orders_download_label.

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