Get Order Shipment Tracks

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

Annotations already cover read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior, so the bar is lower. The description adds a valuable behavioral detail—that it does not return shipment line items—which is not captured in annotations. This extra clarity about the return scope goes beyond the structured fields.

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 sentences with no filler: the first sentence states the core purpose, and the second adds a critical limitation. The key information is front-loaded, and every word earns its place.

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 that an output schema exists, the description sufficiently covers the tool's purpose and a key limitation. No critical information is missing for an agent to decide when to call this tool and what to expect from the return. The common parameters are also fully documented in the schema.

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%, and the description does not add any parameter-specific semantics beyond what the schema already documents. The schema fully describes 'increment_id', 'profile', and 'magentoRoot', so the description adds no extra value for parameters; baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 verb 'Returns' and the exact resource ('shipment tracking numbers and carriers') scoped to an order increment_id. It is specific and distinguishes itself from other unrelated sibling tools, leaving no ambiguity about what the tool does.

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 provides a clear context (for an order increment_id) and a negative guideline ('Does NOT return shipment line items'), which implicitly tells an agent not to expect line items and to seek another tool if needed. However, it does not name an alternative, so it falls short of the explicit 'when-not/alternatives' criterion for a 5.

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