cigchat_shop_orders_update

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the burden of behavioral disclosure. It discloses the required 'Manage Flow' scope and HTTP method, but does not explain update semantics (e.g., partial vs full update, required fields, side effects, or return format).

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 a single concise sentence that includes the endpoint and auth scope. It is front-loaded and free of filler.

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 complexity of 13 parameters and no output schema or annotations, the description is too sparse. It does not explain which fields are updatable, how the items array works, or what response to expect, leaving significant ambiguity for an AI agent.

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 69%, and the parameter names and inline descriptions provide some meaning. The description itself adds no parameter-level detail, but does not need to repeat schema. This is a baseline score for moderate coverage.

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 'Update order' with the specific HTTP endpoint, unambiguously indicating a mutation of an existing order. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like create, get_info, and list.

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?

Usage is implied by the name and endpoint, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this vs alternatives. The auth scope requirement is a prerequisite, not usage differentiation.

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