Create draft order

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

Goes well beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, openWorldHint=true) by disclosing that confirm is always forced to false, the store is never charged, and retries are safe when external_id is unique. What's missing is how the caller learns the resulting draft's id or how to find it afterward, which matters for a create operation with no output schema.

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?

Four short sentences, front-loaded with the draft-only constraint and the confirm-flag behavior, then the escalation path, then the idempotency tip. No sentence is filler.

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 safety and idempotency story thoroughly for a mutating tool with nested objects and no output schema. The remaining gap is what comes back from a successful draft creation (order id? draft reference?), which an agent needs in order to call confirm_order later.

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 50%, so the description carries partial burden; it does add real meaning for external_id (use it so a retry cannot duplicate), but items, recipient, and shipping get no coverage in either place. Baseline 3 is appropriate given the description compensates only for one of the undocumented parameters.

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 ('Create a Printful order') and immediately constrains scope to 'as a DRAFT only', which cleanly separates it from confirm_order and create_sync_product in the sibling list. An agent knows exactly what this produces without opening the schema.

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 says fulfillment only happens if you later call confirm_order with confirm=true, naming the alternative and the condition that selects it. It also pre-empts a misuse path by declaring that any confirm flag is ignored, so the agent won't try to force a charge here.

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