request_refund

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions 'request a refund' (mutation) and 'provide a clear reason' but omits details about side effects (e.g., order status change), permissions, time limits, or whether the refund is automatic.

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?

Two short, front-loaded sentences with no wasted words. Every 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?

Given only 2 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the basics effectively. However, for a mutation tool without annotations, additional behavioral context (e.g., refund process, constraints) would improve completeness.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds 'Provide a clear reason' but does not add new meaning beyond the schema's existing descriptions for order_id and reason.

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 action ('request a refund') and the specific resource ('delivered order'), which distinguishes it from siblings like 'cancel_order' (likely for undelivered orders) and 'check_order' (read-only).

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 implies usage context by specifying 'delivered order', providing a clear condition for when to use this tool. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternatives.

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