store

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It adds the useful fact that prices/availability depend on the store, but it does not disclose side effects of changing the delivery address, persistence of changes, or any required permissions. The description is too sparse for a tool with mutating actions like 'set'.

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, front-loaded with the primary function, and avoids extraneous detail. Every sentence earns its place, with the second sentence providing important context about the impact of the store.

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?

The tool has four distinct actions (info, set, lookup, addresses) and a nested address object, yet the description offers only a high-level summary. Without an output schema and with no annotations, the description should provide more detail on what each action returns and what side effects occur, but it does not.

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 the baseline is 3. The description adds a small amount of context by linking store/address to pricing and availability, but it does not elaborate on the parameters themselves. The schema already documents each parameter, so additional value is minimal.

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 function: 'View/change fulfillment store and delivery address.' It uses specific verbs (view/change) and a specific resource (fulfillment store and delivery address), distinguishing it from sibling tools like cart, price, and orders which deal with different concerns.

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 noting that 'Prices and availability depend on the fulfillment store,' suggesting this tool is relevant when store context matters. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over siblings or when not to use it, so guidance remains implied rather than explicit.

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