uber_eats_set_address

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the tool opens a headed browser and mutates the address (implied by 'change'), but does not state whether the change persists across sessions, whether it validates the address, or what happens to an invalid address. The headed-browser behavior is a useful disclosure, warranting a 3.

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 compact—two short sentences plus the args block. It front-loads the confirmation requirement and the address-picker behavior. Efficient and appropriately sized for a single-parameter tool.

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?

With an output schema present and a single parameter, the description is mostly adequate. However, given 0% schema coverage and no annotations, it would benefit from stating the expected address format more explicitly and noting what happens after the address is set (does it affect active checkout?). The description does note the confirmation requirement and browser behavior, which is decent coverage for a simple tool.

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 0%, so the description must compensate for the single 'address' parameter. It states 'New delivery address (street address or landmark)', adding format guidance beyond the bare schema. However, it doesn't clarify whether this should be a full formatted address or just a landmark, leaving some ambiguity.

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 changes the delivery address with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like uber_eats_switch_address and uber_eats_saved_addresses by noting it uses an address picker via a headed browser. However, it doesn't explicitly contrast with uber_eats_switch_address, so differentiation is partial.

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?

Provides explicit guidance to always confirm with the user before calling, which is important human-oversight context. Notes it opens a headed browser via the address picker. However, it doesn't explicitly state when NOT to use this vs alternatives like uber_eats_switch_address or uber_eats_saved_addresses.

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