Pending shipping

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 conveys a read-only list operation but does not mention return format, pagination, date filtering semantics, or any side effects or permissions. The added detail about shipping number registration is helpful but not sufficient for full transparency.

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 a single concise phrase that immediately conveys the tool's purpose. It is front-loaded and free of unnecessary words, earning high marks for conciseness.

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 simple two-parameter read-only list without an output schema, the description covers the basic purpose but lacks parameter explanations, usage context, and any caveats. The presence of many sibling tools increases the need for clearer placement, which the description does not provide.

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%, and the description does not explain the meaning or format of start_date and end_date. The tool has two undocumented parameters with no compensating context in the description, providing virtually no semantic value beyond the raw schema.

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 specifically identifies the tool as a list of orders awaiting shipment with no shipping number registered (発送待ち注文一覧（配送番号未登録のもの）). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like rms_unconfirmed_orders and rms_search_orders, aligning with the definition of specific verb+resource.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as rms_search_orders or rms_unconfirmed_orders. The description only states what the tool does, not when to choose it.

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