update_scheduled_order

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not reveal whether updates are partial or full, if permissions are required, or what happens to unspecified fields. The phrase 'Update' implies change but offers no details about side effects or response 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 a single concise sentence, front-loaded with the verb and object. It avoids unnecessary words. However, it is somewhat under-specified given the tool's complexity, but it is not a tautology and earns its place as a clear, brief summary.

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 complex update tool with 8 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations. The one-sentence description is insufficient to fully understand the tool's behavior, such as whether it performs a partial or full update, how it interacts with related resources, or what the return value looks like. Significant gaps remain in the overall context.

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 all 8 parameters are already well-documented in the input schema. The description itself adds no parameter-specific meaning, but the high schema coverage meets the baseline. The description does not clarify relationships between parameters or usage patterns beyond what the schema provides.

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 an existing scheduled release order' – a specific verb ('Update') and resource ('scheduled release order'). This distinguishes it from siblings like 'create_scheduled_order' and 'get_scheduled_order', making the tool's purpose unambiguous.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites, scenarios where this tool is appropriate, or exclusions (e.g., 'use create_scheduled_order to make new orders'). The description simply states the action without contextual direction.

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