place_order

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

Annotations already flag destructive/openWorld/non-idempotent, and the description adds critical context beyond them: the tool spends real money, the total is validated against review_order and can be refused, and the order is only final once payment is completed. That is exactly the behavioral disclosure an agent needs for an irreversible purchase.

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?

Front-loads the money-spending warning, then prerequisites, then parameter constraints and post-payment flow in four tight sentences with no filler. Every sentence 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?

Covers the sequencing prerequisite, the total-validation refusal, and the payment_url handoff. Output schema exists so return-value details needn't be repeated, and the description still surfaces the one output (payment_url) the agent must act on.

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 0%, so the description carries the burden and does well: expected_total's equality constraint with review_order's total_to_pay and note's optional restaurant/driver message are both meaningfully explained. delivery_time is left unexplained, a minor gap since it defaults to ASAP.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('PLACE A REAL ORDER') and immediately distinguishes it from the sibling review_order, which the agent must call first. The uppercase emphasis on 'REAL' and 'costs money' makes the consequential nature unmistakable.

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?

Explicit precondition: only call after the user confirms the review_order result, with expected_total matching review_order's total_to_pay. It also states the failure condition (refused if total changed) and the post-call flow for iDEAL/card, leaving no ambiguity about when and how to sequence.

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