Track a shipment

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

Annotations already state readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the API-key prerequisite and the either-party access rule, which is useful, but it does not disclose what tracking information is returned, rate limits, or error behavior.

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 short and front-loaded, with no wasted sentences. The fragment style ('Either party. Requires GLONGUS_API_KEY.') is efficient but slightly telegraphic.

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?

This is a read-only tracking tool with no output schema and no parameter descriptions, so the description carries more explanatory burden. It omits what tracking data is returned (carrier, status, events), what errors may occur, and how to interpret transaction_id, leaving the agent under-informed beyond the annotations.

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 single required parameter transaction_id has 0% schema description coverage, and the description does not explain its format, the ^txn\_ pattern, or how an agent should obtain it. The phrase 'shipped transaction' provides only weak contextual linkage and does not compensate for the missing parameter semantics.

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 clear action and resource: carrier tracking for a shipped transaction. It is understandable without opening the schema, but it does not explicitly distinguish this from siblings like get_transaction, get_shipping_rates, or book_shipping_label.

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 gives useful context that either party may use it and that GLONGUS_API_KEY is required, along with the shipped-transaction scope. However, it does not state when to choose this tool over get_transaction or get_shipping_rates, nor does it list exclusions or failure conditions.

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