tiendanube_draft_orders_confirmConfirms a Tiendanube draft order, converting it into a real order so you can finalize sales and proceed with fulfillment.
Convert a draft order into a real confirmed Order. HTTP: POST /draft_orders/{id}/confirm Required scope: write_draft_orders API version: 2025-03
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | Draft order ID |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare this is a non-readonly, non-idempotent, open-world operation. The description adds required auth scope and API version, but does not disclose side effects, irreversibility, or failure conditions of confirmation.
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 front-loaded, compact, and every sentence contributes endpoint, scope, or version information. There is no wasted prose.
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?
For a one-parameter mutation, the description covers the core action and auth scope. However, with no output schema, it does not describe what is returned or what side effects occur when a draft becomes a confirmed order.
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 only parameter is already documented as the draft order ID. The description adds no new parameter-level detail beyond the endpoint path placeholder.
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 states a specific verb and resource: convert a draft order into a real confirmed order. It clearly distinguishes this state transition from sibling draft-order operations such as update, delete, and get.
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?
It implies the use case of finalizing a draft order, but does not explicitly compare when to use confirm versus draft_orders_update or orders_create. Required scope is given, but no exclusions or preconditions are stated.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.