Track shipment

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

The description discloses the output content (tracking history, status events, estimated delivery, details) but does not state whether the operation is read-only, any authentication requirements, rate limits, or error behavior. With no annotations to indicate safety, the description could be more explicit about side effects (e.g., 'does not modify any data').

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 two sentences long, direct, and free of extraneous information. It efficiently covers both the action and the expected output without redundancy.

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 absence of an output schema, the description adequately covers what the tool returns (tracking history, status events, estimated delivery, delivery details). It does not detail response format or error cases, but for a tracking tool, the input requirements and high-level output are sufficient for an agent to decide on and invoke the 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?

The description adds value by including a concrete example ('e.g. 84971563697SE') and clarifying that the 'id' parameter accepts multiple identifier types (shipment ID, item ID, or reference). The locale parameter's purpose and default are clearly explained, though the description largely mirrors 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 tool's purpose: tracking a PostNord shipment by ID, item, or reference, and enumerates the returned data (tracking history, status events, estimated delivery, delivery details). It is distinct from the sibling tools, which focus on service points and transit time, not shipment status tracking.

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 implicitly conveys when to use this tool (whenever a shipment's status is required) by listing the exact input types and deliverables. It does not explicitly contrast with alternatives, but the sibling tools address different needs (service points, transit time), making the intended use obvious.

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