Confirm draft order

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

Adds important context beyond annotations: the call charges the store payment method and requires explicit human intent. This explains what destructiveHint=true means in practice and gives a strong safety gate.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the action and consequence, then the confirm requirement, then the safety condition. No wasted text.

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?

For a two-parameter destructive mutation with complete schema coverage and annotations, the description covers purpose, payment consequence, required confirmation, and the human-approval condition. Nothing critical is missing.

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 coverage is 100%, so both parameters are already documented, including confirm's const true and order_id's meaning. The description reinforces confirm must be true but adds no new syntax or constraints.

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: submitting an existing DRAFT order for fulfillment, and clarifies the charge consequence. This distinguishes it from create_order (new order) and cancel_order (cancellation) without ambiguity.

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?

Explicitly limits use to when a person has asked to place and pay for the order, and requires an existing DRAFT order. It does not name the sibling create_order as the alternative for creating a new order, but the precondition is clear enough.

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